[Synoptic-L] fatigue and tidying up
- Leonard Maluf wrote --
>I began with an element ignored altogether by Brian (and I think
>necessary for an effective response to Mark G's position), which was
>to show how Matt's text makes good sense as a first telling of the
>story, that it is consistent with the remainder of Matt's text and
>tendencies, and that it has no intrinsic problems of coherency that are
>really serious. (If this could not be done, then the following step
>would not, by itself, fully recover respectability for the GH).
I considered doing the same as you described above, but decided
that this would rule out a priori the possibility that there are
inconsistencies in Matthew which, on the FH, can be understood as
fatigue on the part of Matthew as he used Mark. On the FH, if there are
no inconsistencies in Matthew, then there is no fatigue.
My starting point was therefore to describe how, on the basis of the FH
or similar, it is possible to understand the Death of John the Baptist
in Matthew as an instance of fatigue on the part of Matthew as he used
Mark. I then showed that the same two passages, from the viewpoint of
the GH, can be understood as Mark characteristically editing Matthew.
The data can be explained in each direction. As I explicitly stated in
my last posting, I was not trying to argue for either Matthew or Mark
being written first. Since the FH and GH are mutually contradictory, I
do not see how we can show the "full respectability" of one without
ruling out the other.
EM brian@... HP www.twonh.demon.co.uk TEL+44(0)1480385043
Rev B.E.Wilson,10 York Close,Godmanchester,Huntingdon,Cambs,PE18 8EB,UK
> "What can be said at all can be said clearly; and whereof one cannot_
> speak thereof one must be silent." Ludwig Wittgenstein, "Tractatus".