Re: [Synoptic-L] Re: A complete list of the graphical representation of first-order gospelrelationships
- View Source
> Pretty interesting. This synoptic theory #862:
> K->M a->K a->L a->b b->M b->L
> where you have named "a" as Lk1.0 and "b" as Mt1.0.
>It also contains (almost) the 2SH, Luke is dependant on a proto-Mark instead
> Structurally, it is basically the Farrer Theory,
> but with a proto-Mark and proto-Matthew in place
> of their respective canonical versions. The final
> Mark and Matthew are descendents of their respective
> proto-versions and Matthew being further dependent
> on Mark.
It can also account for any argument for Lukian priorty the the JSH might
>I called it Lk1.0 here, because Brian had named it that in the previous
> The difference between this quasi-Farrer and your
> explanation is that you characterize "a" as a proto-Luke
> not a proto-Mark. Why did you decide this?
"Proto-Mark/Luke" might be most accurate, since if you are looking in a
the triple agreements, and the Mk/Lk agreements against Mt would be
attributed to it.
Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...