In my view there is no solution to the problem of the double tradition. Each proposed solution leaves loose ends; none deals effectively with all of the data.
Without a doubt, the minor agreements are the loose ends of the two source theory. But all of the other theories produce phenomena about which one legitimately comment, "To me
that is wholly incredible."
A problem I have with the "source camps" is that once they've uttered this comment about somebody else's loose ends, they seem to fold their arms as if the discussion is concluded, when all they've done is re-state the problem.
(Not saying you're doing this; your post prompted the thought.)
Rev. Chuck Jones
Ron Price <ron.price@...
In a recent investigation I looked in the Triple Tradition in Matthew and
Luke for consecutive identical Greek words in strings longer than ten words,
and found 10 such strings. So these are all cases where both Matthew and
Luke happened to be following Mark faithfully, right?
Wrong. In fact in only 4 of the 10 cases does the Markan text agree exactly
with both Matthew and Luke. I wondered whether this effect would still occur
if the minimum string length were reduced from 11 words to 9 words. So I
extended the investigation and found there are altogether 22 strings of
consecutive Triple Tradition words identical in Matthew and Luke and having
at least 9 words. Of these, 8 strings (including 3 belonging to OT quotes)
are identical in Mark, and 14 differ from Mark.
So are we to believe that Luke just happened to make the same changes as
Matthew in 14 of these 22 cases when editing Mark? Or to look at it a
different way, are observed instances of identical strings more likely than
not to involve the two editors coincidentally making the same changes? To me
that is wholly incredible.
Of course I know this investigation is just another way of looking at the
'Minor Agreements', but it's surely a reminder of the frailty of the Two
Web site: http://homepage.virgin.net/ron.price/index.htm
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]