|(1) Marks Gospel is not really an abridgment.
How does Mark performs his editorial task of abridgment? I believe we need
to perform compositional analysis to understand any argument from order.
This may be true with respect to any synoptic argument. I gave two examples
of how Mark performs his task: 1) where he sees a conflict between Matt and
Luke, he omits completely as with the genealogies; 2) where he sees a
conflict between Matt and Luke, he pick the one he believes is correct as
with the theology of the cross. In many instances as noted, Mark even though
he abridges, he expands what remains. If there is any validity to the
argument either for or against, the merits of the argument has to be based
on compositional analysis. Of the three synoptic gospel, on my view the
material Mark does not derive from either Matt or Luke is small as compared
to what has to be otherwise explained if Mark is first. My Q if there is a Q
is easily defined and does not change every year.
Richard H. Anderson
Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...