I saw your question on the Seminar list, and I am certainly interested to
hear the answer.
In the mean time, I thought I'd mention my reasoning for these on the main
My thought is that Luke is working from two documents, and is in general
trying to preserve the order and content
of the original document. The specific cases you mention would be things
that were not in Luke's
early source at all. Thus Luke groups them with all the other material that
is in his new source
but not his old source.
Gos-A (non-Greek) => Gos-B
Gos-A + Gos-B => Mark
Gos-B + sayings => proto-Matt.&Q
proto-Matt.&Q + Mark => Matthew
proto-Matt.&Q + Gos-A => Luke
So on my hypothesis, the sayings you mention were not in Gos-A.
They are added in Gos-B.
Mark , proto-Matt, and Matthew all have them in their Gos-B/Markian
From Luke's perspective these additions that were made to form Gos-B,
appear no different than the much
greater number of additions that are made going from Gos-B to proto-Matt.
Thus Luke treats them identically and places them in his new special
Sent by: owner-synoptic-s@...
Subject: [Excavating-Q] Luke's ordering of the Q material
I note in at least five of theses cases (Q 12:10/Mk. 3:28-30; Q
12:11-12/Mk. 13:11; Q 13:18-19/Mk. 4.30-32; Q 13:30/Mk.
10.31; Q 17:1-2/Mk. 9:42) Luke has omitted or re-written the
Markan version in its Markan context so that he could use the
Q version in its Q context instead.
Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...