I can concede willingly the idea that there was already, before our Gospels, a "worksite in good order", to quote Alfaric quoted by Guy Fau (Puzzle des evangiles):neilgodfrey wrote: ↑Thu Sep 30, 2021 12:15 am
My point was that there is a difference between a narrative and the raw material (not ideologically neutral, though!) that was incorporated into those narratives -- and narratives can take different shape ideologically, for and against certain doctrines and teachings and persons, as we see in the mix of different narratives in the early Acts and Gospels.
One could evidently imagine that the evangelists, knowing the Bible well, went to draw from it, each directly, the texts they invoke. But it would be very unlikely that they would have used the same texts in this way. On the contrary, if they had in their hands a collection of prophecies already extracted from the Bible, they possessed, as Alfaric has said, a "worksite in good order," an authentic life of the Messiah which they had only to actualize, - although Mark and Luke, unlike Matthew, more often forget to cite their biblical sources.
Evidence that they [the Gospel writers] used such a collection can be gleaned from the texts themselves. For example, Mark attributes the following prophecy to Isaiah alone: "Behold, I send my messenger before you; he will prepare your way. Voice of one crying in the wilderness: prepare the way of the Lord, make straight his paths." But if the second phrase is indeed from Isaiah, the first figures in Malachi. We may therefore think that these two texts were brought together, and that the author of Mark took them for a single quotation. Again Matthew and Luke did not make the same mistake this time; but here are groupings common to the Synoptics.
Evidence that they [the Gospel writers] used such a collection can be gleaned from the texts themselves. For example, Mark attributes the following prophecy to Isaiah alone: "Behold, I send my messenger before you; he will prepare your way. Voice of one crying in the wilderness: prepare the way of the Lord, make straight his paths." But if the second phrase is indeed from Isaiah, the first figures in Malachi. We may therefore think that these two texts were brought together, and that the author of Mark took them for a single quotation. Again Matthew and Luke did not make the same mistake this time; but here are groupings common to the Synoptics.
(my bold)
I can concede that such pre-Gospel "worksite in good order" was neutral, i.e. not interested to attack rival sectarians.
What I can't concede is that the earliest gospels themselves were equally neutral. The example of Jesus being beaten up by (1) Romans (in Mark) or by (2) sinedrites (in Marcion) doesn't concede much free choice (beyond 1 and 2) about other different midrashical meaning behind the episode.