Galatians 1 & Mark 1

[Benway]

If euthus/eutheos is common in Mark, but its use in Galatians 1 is unusual, then wouldn't that hint that Galatians 1 draws on Mark, rather than the other way around?

The verbal echo by itself doesn’t mean much.

Some crazy people on this site think that Galatians could have been written after gMark. I think they’re probably smoking too much weed!

I suppose it's a bit slim. And hey, some of us are just crazy anyway despite the lack of weed!*

*I make no comment on gin martinis.

[Irish1975]

I’ll drink to that

[Giuseppe]

gMark is telling the story of Paul over again, but this time through Jesus. Or at least that is one significant layer in gMark. I have been reading Paul Nadim Tarazi, who sees Paul almost everywhere in gMark, almost to the point of absurdity. It’s good to be modest about what gMark “means.” But at any rate this interpretation is an important corrective to mainstream NT scholars, who like to pretend that the Evangelists were in fact completely ignorant of the Pauline epistles.

I don't like to invade other threads with my own views to not appear as a disturber and a troll, but the temptation is too much strong to signal how this entire discourse of "Jesus"/Paul (Tarazi, Dykstra, Adamczewski docent) reflects a even more old marcionite layer...