Search found 3938 matches
- Mon Apr 19, 2021 8:24 am
- Forum: Christian Texts and History
- Topic: Demonstrating Q (Quelle) was a document and "Luke" did not know gMatthew.
- Replies: 83
- Views: 23770
Re: Demonstrating Q (Quelle) was a document and "Luke" did not know gMatthew.
to Ben, Instead of bringing in an entire document, why not make the much less grand assumption that this particular saying of Jesus was famous enough and held enough credibility in the Lucan community that he could not ignore it? Why assume for an entire document what might apply only to one or two ...
- Mon Apr 19, 2021 7:32 am
- Forum: Christian Texts and History
- Topic: Demonstrating Q (Quelle) was a document and "Luke" did not know gMatthew.
- Replies: 83
- Views: 23770
Re: Demonstrating Q (Quelle) was a document and "Luke" did not know gMatthew.
to Ben, How does this argument work? Why would Luke reproduce a saying he does not like either from Matthew or from Q? Why is it okay for him to copy such a displeasing saying from Q but not from Matthew? I think that Q had a lot of credibility in Luke's community (more than for gMark) and "Luk...
- Sun Apr 18, 2021 4:44 pm
- Forum: Christian Texts and History
- Topic: Demonstrating Q (Quelle) was a document and "Luke" did not know gMatthew.
- Replies: 83
- Views: 23770
Re: Demonstrating Q (Quelle) was a document and "Luke" did not know gMatthew.
to Ken Olson, Because we don't generally hypothesize lost documents to explain things equally well as existing documents we already have. The lost document has to provide a significantly different and better explanation for us to need to hypothesize it in the first place. At no point will I be able ...
- Sat Apr 17, 2021 6:44 pm
- Forum: Christian Texts and History
- Topic: Demonstrating Q (Quelle) was a document and "Luke" did not know gMatthew.
- Replies: 83
- Views: 23770
Re: Demonstrating Q (Quelle) was a document and "Luke" did not know gMatthew.
to Ken Olson, I thought you were going to cover the Mark-Q overlap passages (known on the Farrer theory as the triple tradition passages for which Luke followed Matthew rather than Mark as a source). No matter. I did not cover that in my latest post. I put the Mark-Q overlaps in the category: gMark-...
- Sat Apr 17, 2021 4:20 pm
- Forum: Christian Texts and History
- Topic: Demonstrating Q (Quelle) was a document and "Luke" did not know gMatthew.
- Replies: 83
- Views: 23770
Re: Demonstrating Q (Quelle) was a document and "Luke" did not know gMatthew.
to Ken Olson, It has the Minor Agreement “who is it that struck you?” that is found in the scene of Jesus’s trial before the Sanhedrin. So it must have the trial scene and therefore a Passion Narrative. The location and time of the scene was provided by gMark 14:65. It also has all the other Minor A...
- Sat Apr 17, 2021 12:05 pm
- Forum: Christian Texts and History
- Topic: A peculiar (and mathematical) argument for Lucan priority and Matthean posteriority.
- Replies: 44
- Views: 15515
Re: A peculiar (and mathematical) argument for Lucan priority and Matthean posteriority.
to hakeem,
Your last post has nothing to do with this thread.
Cordially, Bernard
Your last post has nothing to do with this thread.
Cordially, Bernard
- Sat Apr 17, 2021 11:25 am
- Forum: Christian Texts and History
- Topic: A peculiar (and mathematical) argument for Lucan priority and Matthean posteriority.
- Replies: 44
- Views: 15515
Re: A peculiar (and mathematical) argument for Lucan priority and Matthean posteriority.
to Ken Olson, Ben Smith, Peter Kirby and all: Block Saying Matthew Luke Other Parallels A Disciple and master. 10.24-25 6.40 — B 1 Fear not. 10.26-31 12.2-7 Mark 4.22 = Luke 8.17 B 2 Before my father. 10.32-33 12.8-9 Matthew 16.27 = Mark 8.38 = Luke 9.26 C 1 No peace on earth. 10.34 12.50 — C 2 The ...
- Thu Apr 15, 2021 9:12 am
- Forum: Christian Texts and History
- Topic: Demonstrating Q (Quelle) was a document and "Luke" did not know gMatthew.
- Replies: 83
- Views: 23770
Re: Demonstrating Q (Quelle) was a document and "Luke" did not know gMatthew.
I know you are waiting for my final section ;) So here it is, and waiting for your critique: E) Minor agreements between gLuke and gMatthew against gMark According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-source_hypothesis : "The "minor agreements"—the word "minor" here is not i...
- Tue Apr 13, 2021 5:17 pm
- Forum: Christian Texts and History
- Topic: Gospel of the Hebrews / Marcion parallels
- Replies: 11
- Views: 5531
Re: Gospel of the Hebrews / Marcion parallels
to Ben, Yes, I can see that Roth attests "lake" in 8.23. In his book, he puts the relevant phrase, including "lake," in verse 23 in parentheses (page 417), which indicates that the "precise wording is not attested" (page 411), whereas he does not put "sea" in ...
- Tue Apr 13, 2021 2:56 pm
- Forum: Christian Texts and History
- Topic: Gospel of the Hebrews / Marcion parallels
- Replies: 11
- Views: 5531
Re: Gospel of the Hebrews / Marcion parallels
to Ben,
Note: gMark & gMatthew have no 'lake' anywhere.
Cordially, Bernard
gMarcion has 'sea' instead of 'water' in 8:24 & 25, but has 'lake' in 8:23 as in gLuke."sea" is also attested for Marcion, in agreement with Matthew and Mark but not with Luke.
Note: gMark & gMatthew have no 'lake' anywhere.
Cordially, Bernard