Toto

If Mark knew Paul's letters (or some version of them), that would imply that those letters were in circulation. Matt and Luke could have come across a copy of Mark without also having access to Paul's letters, but it seems most probable that they would also have access to the sources that Mark used.

I would then expect more coherence between Paul and the Matt-Luke overlap that is called Q.

Peter Kirby

Could be, or it could be that Mark knew Paul or a friend of Paul, or was in a recipient church, and had access to a copy of one or more letters without them being in general circulation.

Could be, but it does not follow that they did in fact ever lay eyes on a copy of Paul's letters, or that if they did they owned a copy or used a copy in their own work. It's not as though Mark was then circulating with a copy of Paul attached, was it? I know that I use sources without ever getting hold of the sources of those sources, even though I have access to them (I'm a ten minute walk from a uni library)--and that I may even possess a source of my source but not consult it.

Do you mean to say that the O.P. failed to show such a coherence? (It's also possible that you mean that your expectation is satisfied and that you are making an inference here; I'm not sure.)

kind thoughts,
Peter Kirby

Toto

There are some tantalizing similarities between Paul and Q1, especially Romans, but not what I would expect if whoever wrote Q1 had Paul's letters in front of him, or if Paul were reporting the sayings of a Galilean preacher which are reflected in Q1. But I think this will take more thought and analysis.

Vorkosigan

What similarities?

Toto

It's past my bedtime, but this one sticks out:

Luke 6:27
"I am telling you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you.

Rom 12:14 Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse.

TedM

The most obvious similarities between Q1 and Paul is that of the messages of the teaching: Love your enemies, don't worry about things, give up all to follow Christ, don't judge lest you be judged, don't be a hypocrite, don't just hear-obey, the kingdom of God is mysterious, don't cling to this life and it's concerns, be peaceful and humble, God's kingdom isn't just for the privileged, apostles have certain specific instructions or rights.

The most obvious differences between is that Q1 illustrates these points with analogies and in story form. Is Paul just passing along the main messages from Q1? Is Q1 building on Paul's main messages? Do either know of the other? Are there clues of which may have been influenced by the other? Could they have both independantly formed without knowledge of the other? How much OT influence is there in each? All of these require a lot more analysis than what any of us have done here so far.

ted

Toto

One would expect to find a great deal of influence from the Hebrew Scriptures and Hellenistic philosophy in both Paul and the gospels. I don't see any basis for assuming a common source unless there are linguistic clues, such as the one I pulled out.

TedM

The accumaltive similarities regarding the rights of an apostle (laborer deserves his wages, right to eating and drinking, say greet with "peace", and "eat whatever is set before you") suggest a link between the two I"m not sure can be easily be explained by the Hebrew scriptures or Hellenistic philosophy. If so AND Q1 and Paul co-exist this may indicate that one knew of the other during Paul's day. If not, what is Paul using as his source and what is Q1 using as its source? Even if Q1 is later, it still begs the question: what did Paul use as his source?

ted

Toto

"The laborer deserves his wages" is cited in 1 Tim 5 as "scriptural" - which usually refers to the Hebrew Scriptures, although I am not aware of any reference for this. But it sounds like a common saying - there's nothing uniquely Christlike about it, is there?

Amaleq13

The NASB connects this reference to Leviticus 19:13 and Deuteronomy 24:15.