At 10:24 AM 12/5/00 +0000, Brian E. Wilson wrote:
>Brian Wilson wrote --
>>It seems to me that at this point Streeter allows as one possibility
>>among others that all three synoptists were dependent on a common
>>documentary source ("each of them must obviously have drawn much of his
>>information from a source ... also accessible to ... both of the
>Stephen Carlson replied --
>>Undoubtedly, Streeter was thinking of some form of Ur-Markus as his
>>other writings attest.
>I am not so sure. ...
>I would suggest therefore that when he wrote in 1919 in (ed.) A.
>S. Peake, "Commentary on the Bible" about a source accessible to all the
>synoptists, Streeter may well have had in mind the 1909 hypothesis that
>Q was the common documentary source of all three synoptic gospels.
Allow me to disagree. By 1924 (closer in time to the Commentary
article than the Oxford Studies piece), Streeter had abandoned his
idea that Mark knew Q, yet still recognized the possibility of an
Ur-Markus. Furthermore, since Mark and Q barely overlapped, it is
hardly the case that Mark "must obviously have drawn *much* of his
information from" Q (emphases added). I am willing to grant you,
though, that in Streeter's quotation "a source or sources" may well
have contemplated the use of Q in addition to, but not instead of,
Ur-Markus by all three synoptics.
Stephen C. Carlson mailto:scarlson@...
Synoptic Problem Home Page http://www.mindspring.com/~scarlson/synopt/
"Poetry speaks of aspirations, and songs chant the words." Shujing 2.35
Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...