tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post2034478871454420250..comments2024-03-21T14:59:20.729-04:00Comments on NT Blog: More Synoptic Problem chatMark Goodacrehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05115370166754797529noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-15908550104002191032009-10-14T13:59:12.700-04:002009-10-14T13:59:12.700-04:00Hi Mark! I read your book, and have posted some th...Hi Mark! I read your book, and have <a href="http://exploringourmatrix.blogspot.com/2009/10/beyond-literary-dependence-and.html" rel="nofollow">posted some thoughts, reflections on and interactions with it</a> - as well as a recommendation that others read it, of course!<br /><br />The word verification was "expel"...James F. McGrathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02561146722461747647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-34330393331351462512009-09-28T11:34:24.800-04:002009-09-28T11:34:24.800-04:00Wow, Bill, that's a lot of older versions and ...Wow, Bill, that's a lot of older versions and self-revisions. Can't say there <i>wasn't</i> so much churn, just don't know what signs there might be of it going on.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-20194444014386775602009-09-27T13:34:59.433-04:002009-09-27T13:34:59.433-04:00No, it is boring. It makes me wonder what some aca...No, it is boring. It makes me wonder what some academics are about. They have made little progress in 2000 years. There must be another solution.geoffhudson.blogspot.comhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14724916983698195467noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-8673164266481746412009-09-27T11:47:44.447-04:002009-09-27T11:47:44.447-04:00Bill,
Your suggestion seems quite plausible up to...Bill,<br /><br />Your suggestion seems quite plausible up to a point: <i>First, Mark used an earlier, more basic version of Matthew, second, Luke used Mark, and third, Matthew revised his own work, utilizing Luke but ignoring Mark.</i><br /><br />I've found that it's not the case at all, that Mark shows no signs of "fatigue" relative to Matthew. Instead, the opposite is the case, strongly suggesting Matthean priority. I've posted 16 instances (it used to be 17) of Markan fatigue relative to Matthew <a href="http://www.tjresearch.info/MAH.htm#FatinMk" rel="nofollow">here</a>. Mark G's 5 cases in the opposite direction have been shown to be straightforwardly reversible.<br /><br />But I have yet to hear from Mark about it.<br /><br />To me it's plausible that the later reviser of Matthew (translator, I contend, of Semitic Matthew into Greek) did make some use of Mark as well as Luke. He apparently added 3 pro-gentile passages (not in Mark or Luke), and generated excessive Greek verbal agreement with Mark as he did with Luke.Jim Deardorffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04517653430586348063noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-90976847449096016632009-09-26T01:32:08.497-04:002009-09-26T01:32:08.497-04:00Ah. It doesn't reverse, does it? (Or does it...<a href="http://www.markgoodacre.org/Q/fatigue.htm" rel="nofollow">Ah</a>. It doesn't reverse, does it? (Or does it?)<br /><br />Either way, NOW I'm intrigued...Bill Heromanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05283809456471966882noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-72648202893686996662009-09-26T01:15:36.712-04:002009-09-26T01:15:36.712-04:00SF, I meant "relative lack", but now I s...SF, I meant "relative lack", but now I see your point. Thank you. (Duh.)<br /><br />So why would Mt show fatigue with Mk and not Luke? Maybe it's the other way around.<br /><br />Consider: First, Mark used an earlier, more basic version of Matthew, second, Luke used Mark, and third, Matthew revised his own work, utilizing Luke but ignoring Mark.<br /><br />Plausible? Anyone?Bill Heromanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05283809456471966882noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-70547313078612754972009-09-26T01:08:25.394-04:002009-09-26T01:08:25.394-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.Bill Heromanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05283809456471966882noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-81166817256576719612009-09-25T17:49:46.503-04:002009-09-25T17:49:46.503-04:00I think the question of why they told such stories...I think the question of why they told such stories does not have to depend on the answer to a question that seems unanswerable. It does, however, relate to possible experience of the evangelists. For example, the blind man who saw men as trees walking, unique to Mark, is omitted by Mt and Lk. Is this because they knew that it was a personal parable of the Evangelist. Or if you are a Griesbachian, is it like the young man in the garden, a personal signature of the Evangelist? Does it help reframe our idea of miracle story?<br /><br />I would like to get past the fatigue and literary or aural dependency. I certainly agree with MG that the parable of the talents is confused in Luke. Fatigue is one explanation for the confusion. What does such confusion tell us beyond that explanation? Is the text corrupt for instance? There are certainly examples of this as a reasonable conjecture in the older scriptures like Job.Bob MacDonaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11335631079939764763noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-27850689835194975592009-09-25T17:24:01.453-04:002009-09-25T17:24:01.453-04:00Matthew does show fatigue when he treats Markan ma...Matthew does show fatigue when he treats Markan materialAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-45734112178030673572009-09-25T17:18:14.641-04:002009-09-25T17:18:14.641-04:00Could Matthew's lack of fatigue potentially me...Could Matthew's lack of fatigue potentially mean he spent a much longer time carefully editing his own document?Bill Heromanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05283809456471966882noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-21095612634852946682009-09-25T16:44:13.125-04:002009-09-25T16:44:13.125-04:00... Granted that's a pretty big "IF"...... Granted that's a pretty big "IF"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-67689166395572314752009-09-25T16:43:29.349-04:002009-09-25T16:43:29.349-04:00I don't know, Bob. Examining whether Matthew t...I don't know, Bob. Examining whether Matthew thought that Jesus considered himself God would be of great benefit on that subject. Would knowing where Matthew got his material be useful? If it can cast light on the development of thoughts and views through out the first century, then it may prove very useful.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-59848242916109442482009-09-25T16:00:15.041-04:002009-09-25T16:00:15.041-04:00Yes it is not dull but it can seem like a red-herr...Yes it is not dull but it can seem like a red-herring. In what way does it lead us to an understanding of why the evangelists focused with such severe perseveration on Jesus?Bob MacDonaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11335631079939764763noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-52148002789101363352009-09-25T14:20:04.925-04:002009-09-25T14:20:04.925-04:00It is indeed fascinating - but what I'm beginn...It is indeed fascinating - but what I'm beginning to wonder is whether it will inspire any new versions of Christmas songs this year! :)James F. McGrathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02561146722461747647noreply@blogger.com