Matthean posteriority: Mark's "Levi son of Alphaeus"

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Matthean posteriority: Mark's "Levi son of Alphaeus"

Post by neilgodfrey »

gryan wrote: Thu Sep 29, 2022 6:58 pm
neilgodfrey wrote: Thu Sep 29, 2022 3:28 pm
gryan wrote: Thu Sep 29, 2022 1:50 pm
And I would also like to hear from you and others in response to my "narrative thought experiment" question:
viewtopic.php?p=143385#p143385
How does that experiment explain how Levi entered the picture?
May I take that as an implicit yes: It is possible that GMatt made a list of the 12 where "the tax collector" could be James son of Alphaeus?

Re: how Levi entered the picture

I don't know. But this much seems obvious: GMk and GMatt get along side by side in the canon better than they would have with James son of Alphaeus and Matthew featured in two nearly identical call stories. Maybe "Levi" was the former name of Matthew, as tradition holds. Or maybe Levi was the former name of James son of Alphaeus. Or maybe it was a symbolic invention, as you suggest.

Pondering. I wonder what a professional textual critic would say.

I would welcome feedback from others in response to my "narrative thought experiment" question:
viewtopic.php?p=143385#p143385
Your scenario is a reminder that we don't have "the text" of Mark but a selection (at least an educated selection) from a smorgasbord of manuscripts.

One problem I see with your experiment is that it skewers my theory into the dust. ;)

It is neat, but would not a text critic appeal to the principle of lectio difficilior?
gryan
Posts: 1120
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 4:11 am

Re: Matthean posteriority: Mark's "Levi son of Alphaeus"

Post by gryan »

neilgodfrey wrote: Thu Sep 29, 2022 11:23 pm It is neat, but would not a text critic appeal to the principle of lectio difficilior?
Probably.
gryan
Posts: 1120
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 4:11 am

Re: Matthean posteriority: Mark's "Levi son of Alphaeus"

Post by gryan »

gryan wrote: Thu Sep 29, 2022 11:10 pm Notes on the name, Levi, used only three times in the NT, twice by Lk and once by Mk

Lk 5:27, call of Levi
Καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα ἐξῆλθεν,
καὶ ἐθεάσατο τελώνην ὀνόματι Λευεὶν καθήμενον ἐπὶ τὸ τελώνιον,
καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ Ἀκολούθει μοι.

Matt, call of Matthew
Καὶ παράγων ὁ Ἰησοῦς ἐκεῖθεν εἶδεν ἄνθρωπον καθήμενον ἐπὶ τὸ τελώνιον, Μαθθαῖον λεγόμενον,
καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ Ἀκολούθει μοι.

Mk, call of Levi son of Alphaeus
καὶ παράγων εἶδεν Λευεὶν τὸν τοῦ Ἀλφαίου καθήμενον ἐπὶ τὸ τελώνιον,
καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ Ἀκολούθει μοι.
καὶ ἀναστὰς ἠκολούθησεν αὐτῷ.


Lk 5:29, host named Levi
Καὶ ἐποίησεν δοχὴν μεγάλην Λευεὶς αὐτῷ ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ αὐτοῦ·
καὶ ἦν ὄχλος πολὺς τελωνῶν καὶ ἄλλων οἳ ἦσαν μετ’ αὐτῶν κατακείμενοι.

Matt, host not named
Καὶ ἐγένετο αὐτοῦ ἀνακειμένου ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ,
καὶ ἰδοὺ πολλοὶ τελῶναι καὶ ἁμαρτωλοὶ ἐλθόντες συνανέκειντο τῷ Ἰησοῦ καὶ τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ.

Mk, host not named
Καὶ γίνεται κατακεῖσθαι αὐτὸν ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ αὐτοῦ,
καὶ πολλοὶ τελῶναι καὶ ἁμαρτωλοὶ συνανέκειντο τῷ Ἰησοῦ καὶ τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ, ἦσαν γὰρ πολλοὶ καὶ ἠκολούθουν αὐτῷ.
Hypothesis:
Two stories were merged into one -- a tax collector call story and a dining with tax collectors story.


See the NET of the three synoptic accounts (with proper names [bracketed] when they are supplied by the translation, not the Greek):
viewtopic.php?p=143167#p143167

My hypothetical "original" GMark
featured a tax collector named "James son of Alphaeus" and a dining story with no named host.

See this link for a scholarly introduction to the variant textual tradition spotlighting James son Alphaeus rather than Levi son of Alphaeus. I take this alternative text as a "living tradition" of the authorial text of GMk rather than a scribal error:
https://brentnongbri.com/2018/05/21/mat ... and-james/

GLk
came out with a "Levi" (named simply) appearing in both the call story and the dining story. The name Levi may have originated with the story of the dining host, and the author of Lk may have decided to use "Levi" in the call story too. But in doing so, the clear "original" Markan link between the call story and the list of the 12 was severed--there is a James son of Alphaeus in the list of the 12, but there is no Levi.

See my notes on the name Levi (above):
viewtopic.php?p=143401#p143401

Hypothesizing that GMatt was written last, in full knowledge of GMk and GLk, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthean_ ... hypothesis,

I have come to argue that GMatt disapproved of GMk's Pauline glorification of James son of Alphaeus.
See my highly original thesis presented here:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=9967

So GMatt
came out with a story of a tax collector named "Matthew".
In his list of the 12, GMatt does two things not seen in any other list of 12 apostles: 1) he moves the name of "Matthew" to be side by side with the name of "James son of Alphaeus" and 2) he puts the label "the tax collector" between them. IMHO, this is an acknowledgment of what readers of my proposed "original" GMk knew: the tax collector in GMark's call story was James son of Alphaeus.

Please check out my "narrative thought experiment":
viewtopic.php?p=143385#p143385

Conclusion

"Levi son of Alphaeus" in the prevailing text of GMk makes no sense in the narrative world of Mark. There is no clue whatsoever that would link "Levi son of Alphaeus" with his supposed other name, "Matthew".

The alternative text featuring "James son of Alphaeus" makes sense in the narrative world of Mark--the call story gives background for one of the 12. However, it contradicts GMatt's call story featuring "Matthew" who is also one of the 12. There is no way that "James son of Alphaeus" could be a former name for "Matthew"!

I suspect that, during a very early stage of synoptic gospel canonization, GMk's authentic authorial "James son of Alphaeus" call story was altered to sidestep the contradiction with GMatt's "Matthew" call story: Thus, in the prevailing text of GMk, we have an invented conflation of GLk's Levi and GMk's James son of Alphaeus -- "Levi son of Alphaues". At first, this person may have been explained as a disciple of Jesus who did not become one of the 12. But eventually, identification as another name for Matthew became the prevailing harmonization of the synoptic accounts.
Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 2110
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: Matthean posteriority: Mark's "Levi son of Alphaeus"

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin »

neilgodfrey wrote: Thu Sep 29, 2022 1:45 pm Can I put a plug in for my own earlier contribution to this discussion: my interpretation does have the advantage of what I would say is a coherent explanation of the text as we have it. Is not that a little point in favour against others that postulate other texts that we do not have?
Of course!

neilgodfrey wrote: Tue Sep 27, 2022 3:14 am If we read Mark's reference in the context of his word-play with other names (personal and topographical) then we might well think that our author is in some way playing with his readers: Levi is the name of the tribe that was called aside to "join" Israel to God. But here the Levi is "joining" Israel to the Romans, not by collecting the tithes as had been ordained but by collecting taxes for the Romans. Furthermore, this Levi has a father with a Greek name, Alphaeus. If we think of Mark writing some time after the first Jewish war, we might suspect he is looking back on the time when many leading Judeans were immersed in Hellenistic-Roman loyalties, and when these "pagan-oriented" Judeans were hated by other (zealot) Jews.
Very good interpretation. I agree that Levi refers to the Levites and their tithes.
rgprice
Posts: 2058
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2018 11:57 pm

Re: Matthean posteriority: Mark's "Levi son of Alphaeus"

Post by rgprice »

For the record gryan, I think I agree with your assessment. Nice work.
Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 2110
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: Matthean posteriority: Mark's "Levi son of Alphaeus"

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin »

.
Synopsis

Minor agreements between Matthew and Luke consist only in the omission of Markan words and phrases (two tiny exceptions). It should therefore hardly be possible to argue for the posteriority of one of them.

Mark 2 Matthew 9 Luke 5
13 καὶ ἐξῆλθεν πάλιν παρὰ τὴν θάλασσαν καὶ πᾶς ὁ ὄχλος ἤρχετο πρὸς αὐτόν καὶ ἐδίδασκεν αὐτούς
13 And He went forth again beside the sea, and all the crowd was coming to Him, and He taught them.
x x
14 καὶ παράγων εἶδεν Λευὶν τὸν τοῦ Ἁλφαίου καθήμενον ἐπὶ τὸ τελώνιον καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ ἀκολούθει μοι καὶ ἀναστὰς ἠκολούθησεν αὐτῷ
14 And passing on, He saw Levi the son of Alphaeus sitting at the tax booth, and says to him, “Follow Me.” And having arisen, he followed Him.
9 Καὶ παράγων ὁ Ἰησοῦς ἐκεῖθεν εἶδεν ἄνθρωπον καθήμενον ἐπὶ τὸ τελώνιον, Μαθθαῖον λεγόμενον, καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ· ἀκολούθει μοι. καὶ ἀναστὰς ἠκολούθησεν αὐτῷ
9 And Jesus passing on from there saw a man called Matthew sitting at the tax booth. And He says to him, “Follow Me.” And having arisen, he followed Him.
27 Καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα ἐξῆλθεν καὶ ἐθεάσατο τελώνην ὀνόματι Λευὶν καθήμενον ἐπὶ τὸ τελώνιον, καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, Ἀκολούθει μοι. 28 καὶ καταλιπὼν πάντα ἀναστὰς ἠκολούθει αὐτῷ.
27 And after these things He went forth and saw a tax collector named Levi sitting at the tax booth. And He said to him, “Follow Me.” 28 And having left all, having arisen, he began to follow Him.
15 καὶ γίνεται κατακεῖσθαι αὐτὸν ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ αὐτοῦ καὶ πολλοὶ τελῶναι καὶ ἁμαρτωλοὶ συνανέκειντο τῷ Ἰησοῦ καὶ τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ ἦσαν γὰρ πολλοὶ καὶ ἠκολούθουν αὐτῷ
15 And it came to pass in His reclining in his house, that many tax collectors and sinners were reclining with Jesus and His disciples; for there were many, and they were following Him.
10 καὶ ἐγένετο αὐτοῦ ἀνακειμένου ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ, καὶ ἰδοὺ πολλοὶ τελῶναι καὶ ἁμαρτωλοὶ ἐλθόντες συνανέκειντο τῷ Ἰησοῦ καὶ τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ.
10 And it came to pass, of Him reclining in the house, that behold, many tax collectors and sinners having come, were reclining with Jesus and His disciples.
29 Καὶ ἐποίησεν δοχὴν μεγάλην Λευὶς αὐτῷ ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἦν ὄχλος πολὺς τελωνῶν καὶ ἄλλων οἳ ἦσαν μετ᾽ αὐτῶν κατακείμενοι.
29 And Levi made a great banquet for Him in his house, and there was a great multitude of tax collectors and others, who were reclining with them.
16 καὶ οἱ γραμματεῖς τῶν Φαρισαίων ἰδόντες ὅτι ἐσθίει μετὰ τῶν ἁμαρτωλῶν καὶ τελωνῶν ἔλεγον τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ ὅτι μετὰ τῶν τελωνῶν καὶ ἁμαρτωλῶν ἐσθίει
16 And the scribes of the Pharisees, having seen Him eating with the sinners and tax collectors, were saying to His disciples, “Why does He eat with the tax collectors and sinners?”
11 καὶ ἰδόντες οἱ Φαρισαῖοι ἔλεγον τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ·διὰ τί μετὰ τῶν τελωνῶν καὶ ἁμαρτωλῶν ἐσθίει ὁ διδάσκαλος ὑμῶν;
11 And having seen it, the Pharisees said to His disciples, “Why does your Teacher eat with the tax collectors and sinners?”
30 καὶ ἐγόγγυζον οἱ Φαρισαῖοι καὶ οἱ γραμματεῖς αὐτῶν πρὸς τοὺς μαθητὰς αὐτοῦ λέγοντες, Διὰ τί μετὰ τῶν τελωνῶν καὶ ἁμαρτωλῶν ἐσθίετε καὶ πίνετε;
30 And the Pharisees and their scribes were grumbling at His disciples, saying, “Why do you eat and drink with the tax collectors and sinners?”
17 καὶ ἀκούσας ὁ Ἰησοῦς λέγει αὐτοῖς οὐ χρείαν ἔχουσιν οἱ ἰσχύοντες ἰατροῦ ἀλλ’ οἱ κακῶς ἔχοντες
17 And Jesus having heard, says to them, “Those being strong have no need of a physician, but those being sick.
12 Ὁ δὲ ἀκούσας εἶπεν οὐ χρείαν ἔχουσιν οἱ ἰσχύοντες ἰατροῦ ἀλλ’ οἱ κακῶς ἔχοντες
12 But having heard, He said, “Not those being strong have need of a physician, but those being sick.
31 καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν πρὸς αὐτούς, Οὐ χρείαν ἔχουσιν οἱ ὑγιαίνοντες ἰατροῦ ἀλλ᾽ οἱ κακῶς ἔχοντες
31And Jesus answering, said to them, “Those being well have no need of a physician, but those being sick.
x 13 πορευθέντες δὲ μάθετε τί ἐστιν·ἔλεος θέλω καὶ οὐ θυσίαν·
13 But having gone, learn what is, ‘I desire mercy and not sacrifice.
x
οὐκ ἦλθον καλέσαι δικαίους ἀλλ’ ἁμαρτωλούς
I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”
οὐ γὰρ ἦλθον καλέσαι δικαίους ἀλλ’ ἁμαρτωλούς.
For I came not to call the righteous, but sinners.”
32 οὐκ ἐλήλυθα καλέσαι δικαίους ἀλλ᾽ ἁμαρτωλοὺς εἰς μετάνοιαν.
32 I have not come to call righteous ones, but sinners, to repentance.”

Trees of Life
Posts: 61
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2018 8:56 am

Re: Matthean posteriority: Mark's "Levi son of Alphaeus"

Post by Trees of Life »

gryan wrote: Mon Sep 26, 2022 7:33 am
The Call of Levi, son of Alphaeus
Mark 2:14-17 (NET)
As he went along, he saw Levi, the son of Alphaeus, sitting at the tax booth.
“Follow me,” he said to him. And he got up and followed him.

As Jesus was having a meal in [Levi’s] home, many tax collectors and sinners were eating with Jesus and his disciples, for there were many who followed him.

When the experts in the law and the Pharisees saw that he was eating with sinners and tax collectors, they said to his disciples, “Why does he eat with tax collectors and sinners?”

When Jesus heard this he said to them,
“Those who are healthy don’t need a physician, but those who are sick do.
I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”

The call of Levi, paternity erased
Luke 5:27-32 (NET)
After this, Jesus went out and saw a tax collector named Levi sitting at the tax booth.
“Follow me,” he said to him. And he got up and followed him, leaving everything behind.

Then Levi gave a great banquet in his house for Jesus, and there was a large crowd of tax collectors and others (ἄλλων) sitting at the table with them.

But the Pharisees and their experts in the law complained to his disciples, saying, “Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?”

Jesus answered them,
“Those who are well don’t need a physician, but those who are sick do.
I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.”

The Call of Matthew, Mercy, not Sacrifice
Matt 9:9 (NET)
As Jesus went on from there, he saw a man named Matthew sitting at the tax booth.
“Follow me,” he said to him. And he got up and followed him.

As Jesus was having a meal in [Matthew’s] house, many tax collectors and sinners came and ate with Jesus and his disciples.

When the Pharisees saw this they said to his disciples, “Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?”

When Jesus heard this he said,
“Those who are healthy don’t need a physician, but those who are sick do.
Go and learn what this saying means: ‘I want mercy and not sacrifice.’
For I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”

'Levi of Alphaeus' is the original text of Mark 2:14, as bible editions show with the italicized 'son' for the addition by copyists:

ASV
And as he passed by, he saw Levi the son of Alphaeus sitting at the place of toll, and he saith unto him, Follow me. And he arose and followed him.

KING JAMES
And as he passed by, he saw Levi the son of Alphaeus sitting at the record of custom, and said unto him, follow me.

DARBY
And passing by, he saw Levi the [son] of Alphaeus sitting at the tax-office, and says to him, Follow me. And he rose up and followed him.

WYCLIFFE
And when he passed, he saw Levi of Alphaeus sitting at the tollbooth, and he said to him, Follow me. And he rose, and followed him.

YOUNG'S LITERAL TRANSLATION
and passing by, he saw Levi of Alpheus sitting at the tax-office, and saith to him, `Be following me,' and he, having risen, did follow him.

Levi the tax collector, being also Matthew the tax collector was the [ .. ] of Alphaeus. Probably not a son of Alphaeus, for he is not depicted together with the sons of Alphaeus, identified as James and Judas¹.

In context, tax collector or creditor of Alphaeus could be considered, something of relevance is meant by Mark, other insights than the earlier gospels have given.

¹James and Judas sons of Alphaeus:
James the Less was the biological son of Alphaeus and his first wife, Mary [History of Joseph the Carpenter]. Alphaeus was the son of Clopas. Clopas was the brother of Joseph the Carpenter. James the Less was the great nephew of Joseph the Carpenter.
Joseph and the Virgin Mary became foster/redeemer parents of James the Less and his brother Judas when Alphaeus was widowed [History of Joseph the Carpenter]. Joseph enrolled James with Mary and kin in Bethlehem. James the Less was the brother of Jesus son of Joseph — The James Ossuary.
User avatar
Ken Olson
Posts: 1277
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 9:26 am

Re: Matthean posteriority: Mark's "Levi son of Alphaeus"

Post by Ken Olson »

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 1:25 pm
neilgodfrey wrote: Tue Sep 27, 2022 3:14 am If we read Mark's reference in the context of his word-play with other names (personal and topographical) then we might well think that our author is in some way playing with his readers: Levi is the name of the tribe that was called aside to "join" Israel to God. But here the Levi is "joining" Israel to the Romans, not by collecting the tithes as had been ordained but by collecting taxes for the Romans. Furthermore, this Levi has a father with a Greek name, Alphaeus. If we think of Mark writing some time after the first Jewish war, we might suspect he is looking back on the time when many leading Judeans were immersed in Hellenistic-Roman loyalties, and when these "pagan-oriented" Judeans were hated by other (zealot) Jews.
Very good interpretation. I agree that Levi refers to the Levites and their tithes.
I think this may well be correct.
Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: Tue Oct 04, 2022 6:47 am Minor agreements between Matthew and Luke consist only in the omission of Markan words and phrases (two tiny exceptions). It should therefore hardly be possible to argue for the posteriority of one of them.
I think this is correct with regard to the internal evidence from the three versions of this pericope in the canonical gospels. However, I would also add that I think this particular Matthean addition may have influenced Luke elsewhere:

Matt 9.13
13 πορευθέντες δὲ μάθετε τί ἐστιν·ἔλεος θέλω καὶ οὐ θυσίαν·
13 But having gone, learn what is, ‘I desire mercy and not sacrifice.

This saying seems to be the theme which is illustrated by Luke's Parable of the Good Samaritan, which Luke attaches at the end of his version of the Lawyer's Question in Luke 10:

An expert in the law stood up to test Jesus.[j] “Teacher,” he said, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?” 26 He said to him, “What is written in the law? What do you read there?” 27 He answered, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind and your neighbor as yourself.” 28 And he said to him, “You have given the right answer; do this, and you will live.”

29 But wanting to vindicate himself, he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?” 30 Jesus replied, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho and fell into the hands of robbers, who stripped him, beat him, and took off, leaving him half dead. 31 Now by chance a priest was going down that road, and when he saw him he passed by on the other side. 32 So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33 But a Samaritan while traveling came upon him, and when he saw him he was moved with compassion. 34 He went to him and bandaged his wounds, treating them with oil and wine. Then he put him on his own animal, brought him to an inn, and took care of him. 35 The next day he took out two denarii, gave them to the innkeeper, and said, ‘Take care of him, and when I come back I will repay you whatever more you spend.’ 36 Which of these three, do you think, was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of the robbers?” 37 He said, “The one who showed him mercy.” Jesus said to him, “Go and do likewise.”

Luke 11.25-28 has parallels in Mark 12.28-31, and Matthew 22.34-40, but 11.29-30, the Parable, is unique to Luke. But what does the parable tell us? It follows from the two commandments to love the Lord your God and to love your neighbor as yourself. The first two passersby are a priest and a Levite, from the classes of Jews who were in charge of the sacrifices conducted at the temple in Jerusalem. They fail to carry out the second commandment to love their neighbors as themselves. Yet a Samaritan, who is not a Jew at all and no part of the Jerusalem temple cult does carry out the second commandment of loving his neighbor (who is his fellow human being, not a member of his nation), and his conduct is held up as a model to be emulated. The message would appear to be that God desires mercy and not sacrifice.

This is necessarily somewhat speculative, but it does make good Lukan sense. Luke has come up with a picturesque way to explicate the theme that God has rejected the particularistic Jerusalem sacrificial cult of the Jews in favor of universal (i.e., non-ethnic) model of ethical behavior. If we allow Neil's interpretation, Luke would be taking the criticism of the Levites and Levitical priesthood from Mark (who has the name Levi) as well as from Matthew (who has the quotation of Hosea 6.6, 'I desire mercy not sacrifice').

Best,

Ken
Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 2110
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: Matthean posteriority: Mark's "Levi son of Alphaeus"

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin »

Ken Olson wrote: Tue Oct 04, 2022 9:32 am This saying seems to be the theme which is illustrated by Luke's Parable of the Good Samaritan, which Luke attaches at the end of his version of the Lawyer's Question in Luke 10:
Hi Ken, I agree and think it's most likely, but it may not impossible to argue the other way around, that is, that Matthew was influenced by Luke. It's just more complicated.
rgprice
Posts: 2058
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2018 11:57 pm

Re: Matthean posteriority: Mark's "Levi son of Alphaeus"

Post by rgprice »

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: Wed Oct 05, 2022 11:51 am
Ken Olson wrote: Tue Oct 04, 2022 9:32 am This saying seems to be the theme which is illustrated by Luke's Parable of the Good Samaritan, which Luke attaches at the end of his version of the Lawyer's Question in Luke 10:
Hi Ken, I agree and think it's most likely, but it may not impossible to argue the other way around, that is, that Matthew was influenced by Luke. It's just more complicated.
Under the hypothesis of Marcionite Priority, Luke 3-23 is essentially Marcion's Gospel (not exactly). Matthew and Luke are both derived from Marcion's Gospel. Luke used a combination of Marcion's Gospel, the Gospel of Matthew, and the Gospel of Mark.

Matthew appears to "copy from Luke" in places that Matthew is using Marcion's Gospel. The author of canonical Luke copies from Matthew in several places.

Thus Matthew and Luke both copy from each other, except Matthew was really copying from Marcion.

But I actually don't think its quite that simple. I think Matthew and Luke were also using other sources, and they may not have used Marcion, they may have used a Gospel that was itself derived from Marcion's Gospel or vice versa.

And for the birth story, it seems they were both independently using the narrative that we find in Vision of Isaiah known as the pocket Gospel (though not from that document, but some other account of essentially the same story).
Post Reply