Chaucer

I see here two instances where Luke takes a Matthew reading against a Mark one:

In box 2, we have the leper address Jesus as "Lord" in both Matthew and Luke, while in Mark the leper gets right to "If you are willing" --

In box 4, we have Luke ending with the gerund, "saying", as in Matthew, while in Mark we have the active instead, "and said to him".

These do appear to be two minor agreements in the triple tradition showing both Matthew and Luke in joint disagreement with Mark. I confess to being curious, please, if Earl Doherty would view these two as coincidence or agreements of some significance?

Thanks,

Chaucer

maryhelena

Thanks for the links - lots of reading....and just a very surface look around and it's pretty obvious that this whole debate over Q is far from over - and by all accounts looks to be something that is seeking prime time - as evidenced by the new study at the University of Copenhagen. Looks to me, that Q is going to be in for a rough ride...

show_no_mercy

Or Marcion knew Mark and Matthew, and Luke is a redone version of Marcion.

Chaucer

And here's another (related) page on Papias to follow up on what YoungAlexander provided:

http://homepage.virgin.net/ron.price/syno_Plog.html

Chaucer

maryhelena

Thanks for the link. Any idea re a website that would have all the Q 'sayings' in the sort of spreadsheet format that spin has posted above?

No Greek though.....

Chaucer

I've found nothing quite like that on the Web, although there are one or two places that do present small groups of the sayings in separate clusters, which is a fairly subjective exercise and not very helpful (IMO). But what I have done myself is just a simple list of the so-called Q sayings (which are readily identifiable simply by culling all the sayings that both Matthew and Luke have in common, but that Mark doesn't have) and arranged them in order as they appear relevant to the narrative in Mark. Before reading the Gentile stats, I had assumed with most scholars that Luke was the more reliable and less "edited" version of the sayings. Thus, the ordered list here is keyed to the chapter/numbering in Luke.

Hope this is useful:

Lk: 3:7-9; 16b-17;
4:1-13;
15:4-5; 7;
7:31-35;
6:12;
6:17; 20-23; 27-33; 35-49;
7:1-3; 6-10; 18-19; 22-28;
11:14-15; 17-26;
12:10;
11:33-35; 12:2-3;
19:12-13; 15-24; 26;
13:18-21;
10:2-16;
10:21-24;
11:16; 29-32; 12:54-56; 58-59;
14:26-27; 17:33;
12:4-9; 22-31;
17:1-4;
14:34-35;
9:57-60;
16:18;
12:33-34; 16:13; 13:24; 26-30;
13:34-35;
14:11;
17:6; 11:2-4; 9-11; 13;
14:16b-19; 21; 23-24;
11:39b-44;
11:46-52;
12:11-12; 51; 53;
17:23-24;
17:26-27; 30; 34-35; 37;
16:16-17;
12:39-40; 42-46;
22:28-30.

Chaucer

spin

That was an underwhelming response to the effort I put into putting this data together to show the complex relationship between the sources. How do you all envisage the Lucan writer working with his two sources to get the results you see? Why do neither Matthew nor Luke have the Marcan sections in dark red? I personally don't think any of the theories is capable of dealing with the indications in this passage.

Matthew 8	Mark 1	Luke 5
2 and there was a leper who came to him and knelt before him, saying,	40 And a leper came to Jesus, beseeching Him and falling on his knees before Him, and saying,	12b there was a man covered with leprosy; and when he saw Jesus, he fell on his face and implored Him,
"Lord, if you are willing, you can make me clean!"	. . . . "If you are willing, You can make me clean."	"Lord, if you are willing, You can make me clean."
	41 Moved with compassion,
3 He stretched out his hand and touched him, saying,	He stretched out his hand and touched him, and said to him,	13 And He stretched out his hand and touched him, saying,
"I am willing; be cleansed." Immediately his leprosy was cleansed.	"I am willing; be cleansed." 42 Immediately the leprosy left him and he was cleansed.	"I am willing; be cleansed." And immediately the leprosy left him.
	43 And He sternly warned him and immediately sent him away,
4 The Jesus said to him, "See that you say to no one; but go, yourself show to the priest, and offer	44 and He said to him, "See that you say nothing to no one; but go, yourself show to the priest and offer	14 And He ordered him to tell no one, "But go away, show yourself to the priest and offer
the gift that Moses commanded, as a testimony to them."	for your cleansing what Moses commanded, as a testimony to them."	for your cleansing what Moses commanded, as a testimony to them."
	45 But he went out and began to proclaim it freely and to spread the news around, to such an extent that Jesus could no longer publicly enter a city, but stayed out in unpopulated areas; and they were coming to Him from everywhere.	15 But the news about Him was spreading even farther, and large crowds were gathering to hear Him and to be healed of their sicknesses.

But the only way one can deal with the relationship between the synoptics is to look closely at specific examples of comparisons.


spin

aa5874

But, there is really nothing complex about developing a theory that the author of gLuke added to or removed certain parts of gMatthew and gMark as found canonised in order to compile his gospel.

The author of gLuke appears to have admitted or implied, in the opening first four verses of the gospel, that he was aware of certain information delivered by eyewitnesses and ministers and had "perfect understanding."

The recipient of the Lucan writing, Theophilus, had already been instructed by some other source, so it is expected that the author of Luke would not be writing an exact word for word copy of the material that was already available.

dog-on

I suppose this depends on what Marcion's gospel actually contained.

dog-on

I don't know what you expect here. Perhaps both Matthew and Luke found it odd to have Jesus "moved with compassion", maybe that line wasn't in the original Mark. We do know, for sure, that Mark has been altered, (LE).

Matthew doesn't like Jesus speaking sternly to people, but Luke simply rewrites the phrase to say Jesus ordered the guy.

This is all quite difficult without the originals, or at least the exact versions that each author had of the other's book...