judge

That may be the case, although as I indictaed above there is a lot more reason for the credibility of the EJ distinctions.

But you also haven't explained why it is automatically strange (which is what I asked Spin) to to have these alternating descriptions. Do you also think it is strange, or would you word it differently?

It doesn't follow it is automatically strange, so the argument needs to be revised.

Added in edit:

Why do you say it is "usually" a sign of two different works coming together?
What evidence do you base this on, apart from portions of the the HB?

Chris Weimer

Is it normal or abnormal for someone to use alternating titles for the same thing, titles which are similar mostly but have small changes.

Usually because I, as a rule, don't like rules. I think without the proper survey saying something is always something is destined to be wrong.

I don't have time to look at it at this moment, but the way Matthew and Luke handle scribes and Pharisees from Mark may be pertinent.

judge

That depends on what is being communicated. By alternating one can communicate the universality of the metaphor. Maybe the author did this.

By always using one metaphor only one aspect of the divine is stressed.

Then, it appears, you cant say usually. Without a survey of evidence it might just as likely be unusual.

I think it is going to be extremely tough to show two sources (even if they were there)