The making of Mt/L/Q-stories from Mark
Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2016 6:16 am
.
Theories of our Bernard are currently hot topics. Personally, I was always very interested in his thesis that Q was a late development of Mark and complementing and correcting Mark's gospel. I agree with many of his observations about the relationship between material of Mark and the double tradition.
I'm curious, how many and which stories can be presented as further developments of Mark.
Theories of our Bernard are currently hot topics. Personally, I was always very interested in his thesis that Q was a late development of Mark and complementing and correcting Mark's gospel. I agree with many of his observations about the relationship between material of Mark and the double tradition.
I think that the thesis of Q-stories or Mt-stories or L-stories as commentaries about Mark deserves an own thread. Of course, these theories can not be proven. It is only possible to present it as likely or plausibly.Bernard wrote:
This page is about demonstrating that the Q source, as (a) document(s), was put together after GMark was known and before GMatthew & GLuke were written. I start by showing "Q" dependance on GMark
I'm curious, how many and which stories can be presented as further developments of Mark.