JonA

With our recent discussions of Q and Ehrman's new book, and while reading through the gospels and a parallel (Gospel Parallels, Burton Throckmorton, Jr. (or via: amazon.co.uk)), I came to wonder whether evolving oral traditions might be a better explanation for some of the supposed 'Q' information rather than a common source document(s).

For example, in mentioning who carried Jesus' cross (labeled a) as he was led to Golgotha, Simon of Cyrene (labeled b) is introduced first in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, but secondarily in the Gospel of Mark:

[HR="1"]100[/HR]
Mark 15:21 (NRSV):

They compelled a passer-by, who was coming in from the country, (a) to carry is cross; it was (b) Simon of Cyrene, the father of Alexander and Rufus.

[HR="1"]100[/HR]

[HR="1"]100[/HR]
Matthew 27:32 (NRSV):

As they went out, they came upon (b) a man from Cyrene named Simon; they compelled this man (a) to carry his cross.

[HR="1"]100[/HR]

[HR="1"]100[/HR]
Luke 23:26 (NRSV):

As they led him away, they seized a man, (b) Simon of Cyrene, who was coming from the country, and they (a) laid the cross on him, and made him carry it behind Jesus.

[HR="1"]100[/HR]

I tried to think of what might account for this difference in ordering. It seems unlikely to have come from a written document. (But I have no knowledge of the original language.) This, of course, represents one of those 'minor agreements' between Matthew and Luke against Mark: a slight reordering that brings the cross-bearer's name (Simon of Cyrene) to the front which had been downplayed in Mark. How did this agreement arise?

Was there a written Q for this part of the Jesus story that differed on the ordering? If so, why did both Matthew and Luke prefer the different order?

I don't think so. At least, I have a hunch in a different direction. I wonder if an evolving oral tradition might better explain the difference in ordering. Perhaps the tradition received by Matthew and Luke, by the time they began writing, had changed, the cross-bearer's perceived importance was different, and so Matthew and Luke rewrote the Mark story to reflect this change in the oral tradition of Jesus that they heard around them.

I'd like to say more; I have other work to take care of. This is just an hypothesis; I only want to see what the more knowledgeable folk around here think of it.

Jon