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

Mark 3:31-35 [was Thomas 79...]

Expand Messages
  • Maluflen@aol.com
    In a message dated 5/6/1999 2:08:52 AM Eastern Daylight Time, deardorj@proaxis.com writes: (Commenting on Mark Goodacre)
    Message 1 of 1 , May 6 6:58 AM
      In a message dated 5/6/1999 2:08:52 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
      deardorj@... writes:

      (Commenting on Mark Goodacre)
      >I think that the substitute idea is a good one, though to make sense of it
      >need Markan Priority without Q. Since Luke has already used Mark's Mothers
      >Brothers section in 8.19-21, when he comes across the same section just
      >Matt. 12.43-45 // Luke 11.24-26, he composes a substitute version, viz.
      >11.27-28. I should add that this is Goulder's point and not mine.

      <<I'm glad that Mark made us aware of Goulder's argument here, as I think it
      is an excellent one, very plausible. With this argument, however, we need
      only that Luke be dependent upon both Mark and Matthew (no Q), without
      needing to specify whether Mark has priority over Matthew or not.>>

      I would concur with Jim's point here, and would only add that the overall
      synoptic phenomenon here only requires that ALk wrote after, and with a
      knowledge of, Matt. Mark's text could well follow both, depending for its
      position and formulation more heavily on Matt than on Lk.

      Leonard Maluf
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.