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

Re: [Synoptic-L] Accounting for the minor agreements

Expand Messages
  • Ron Price
    David Gentile wrote (in defence of his theory which posits two lost ... Dave, A generalized claim like this is not as convincing as a record of a specific
    Message 1 of 1 , Nov 1, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      David Gentile wrote (in defence of his theory which posits two lost
      gospels):

      >There are certainly records of "lost gospels"

      Dave,
      A generalized claim like this is not as convincing as a record of a
      specific writing which can be linked with the posited document.

      >Why [did Luke] leave out the "inside/outside the cup" discussion? (Mk
      7:18 / Mt 15:15)

      He intended to cover the topic in 11:37ff. According to Goulder there
      are clear echoes of Mark 7 in 11:37ff.

      > ..... In the Mark/Q overlap there is no major Mark/Luke agreement
      > against Matthew. (I would explain the minor ones as
      >alterations made by Matthew to features present in both sources.)

      I don't know what you count as "major". How about Mk 4:21 // Lk 8:16
      with no Matthean equivalent in his redaction of Mark?

      Ron Price

      Weston-on-Trent, Derby, UK

      e-mail: ron.price@...

      Web site: http://homepage.virgin.net/ron.price/index.htm

      Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
      List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.