[Synoptic-L] Re: On "cleansing"
- Leonard Maluf wrote:
> Yes, but notice that not a single example of the "cleansing" themeelsewhere
> in Mark is without a Matthean parallel (so, could in theory be derivedfrom
> Matthew). Whereas every example of "leper cleansing" in Matt outside ofthe
> Matt 8:1-4 parallels is without a Markan parallel.From what you go on to say it's clear that you're not relying on this as a
strong argument in itself, but it may nonetheless be worth pointing out that
the very fact that such a high proportion of Mark is paralleled in Matthew
while Matthew also has a great deal of material not paralleled in Mark makes
it a priori likely that one will find more Matthean parallels to a theme
exemplified in Mark than vice versa. On the theory of Markan priority this
is what one would expect, so it can hardly be used as an argument against
Markan priority. I don't think you actually mean to do so, but I'd like to
make sure we don't go down that route.
> This observation should lead one, therefore, to a type of empirical textengage
> analysis I have engaged in, this time with reference to the Matt-Mark
> parallels that treat the theme "cleansing", in order to test which of the
> two treatments is likely to be the more primitive. I would be happy to
> on this line as well.Fair enough, but remember that the point of my observation was specifically
to counter a particular use of your ownership argument. My point is not that
reclassifying the theme as 'cleansing impurity' rather than 'cleansing
leprosy' necessarily produces a strong argument for Markan priority, but
simply that it neutralizes this particular argument for Matthean priority.
The exercise you suggest could well be a way to take the argument further
Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...