Difference between revisions of "Talk:Markan priority"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
When I was looking at the section in the Gospels about Jesus declaring Himself Lord of the Sabbath, I noticed that the placement is not consistent. Mark and Luke place it as follows: '''paralytic healed → Levi (aka Matthew) called → fasting question → Lord of the Sabbath → man with withered hand'''. Matthew's Gospel, OTOH, is different; the healing of the paralytic, the calling of Levi, and the posed question about fasting are placed in the same order as Mark and Luke (in Chapter 9 of the Gospel of Matthew), but the part about the Sabbath isn't mentioned until the start of Chapter 12! Let's evaluate this by separately ''supposing'' the validity of the Augustinian hypothesis and Markan priority, and whether the logic adds up: | When I was looking at the section in the Gospels about Jesus declaring Himself Lord of the Sabbath, I noticed that the placement is not consistent. Mark and Luke place it as follows: '''paralytic healed → Levi (aka Matthew) called → fasting question → Lord of the Sabbath → man with withered hand'''. Matthew's Gospel, OTOH, is different; the healing of the paralytic, the calling of Levi, and the posed question about fasting are placed in the same order as Mark and Luke (in Chapter 9 of the Gospel of Matthew), but the part about the Sabbath isn't mentioned until the start of Chapter 12! Let's evaluate this by separately ''supposing'' the validity of the Augustinian hypothesis and Markan priority, and whether the logic adds up: | ||
| − | * Assuming that the Gospel of Matthew was written first, then it's interesting that Mark and Luke, who subsequently copy from Apostle Matthew, place the section about Jesus being Lord of the Sabbath exactly the same way respective to preceding and succeeding sections. If Matthew's Gospel was written first, then it's plain unlikely that Mark and Luke would have independently and coincidentally felt like placing that part the exact same way; in order to still give credence to the Augustinian hypothesis, either Mark or Luke borrowed the other's work. | + | * Assuming that the Gospel of Matthew was written first, then it's interesting that Mark and Luke, who subsequently would copy from Apostle Matthew, place the section about Jesus being Lord of the Sabbath, not only different from Matthew's placement, yet ''exactly the same way respective to preceding and succeeding sections''. If Matthew's Gospel was written first, then it's plain unlikely that Mark and Luke would have independently and coincidentally felt like placing that part the exact same way; in order to still give credence to the Augustinian hypothesis, either Mark or Luke borrowed the other's work. |
* Under Markan priority, it would go to follow that Mark's Gospel was written first, and Matthew and Luke subsequently copied from him, presumably in their own independent style; this therefore explains why Matthew and Luke's placement of the Sabbath section is different between those two Gospels. When Luke copied from Mark, he felt like retaining Mark's ordering, while when Matthew copied, he decided to place it in a different area respective to preceding and succeeding sections. | * Under Markan priority, it would go to follow that Mark's Gospel was written first, and Matthew and Luke subsequently copied from him, presumably in their own independent style; this therefore explains why Matthew and Luke's placement of the Sabbath section is different between those two Gospels. When Luke copied from Mark, he felt like retaining Mark's ordering, while when Matthew copied, he decided to place it in a different area respective to preceding and succeeding sections. | ||
** Here's something interesting: Matthew's ordering, when one reads [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2011-12&version=ESV Chapters 11 through 12], indicates chronological succession. [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark+2-3&version=ESV Mark] and [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%205-6&version=ESV Luke], OTOH, don't. | ** Here's something interesting: Matthew's ordering, when one reads [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2011-12&version=ESV Chapters 11 through 12], indicates chronological succession. [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark+2-3&version=ESV Mark] and [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%205-6&version=ESV Luke], OTOH, don't. | ||
Using [[Occam's razor]], Markan priority seems like the most sensible conclusion based on the internal evidence. —[[User:LT|<code><span style="background:#FF8181">'''LT'''</span></code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|<sup>(Matthew 26:52)</sup>]]''''' Friday, 19:54, January 26, 2023 (EST) | Using [[Occam's razor]], Markan priority seems like the most sensible conclusion based on the internal evidence. —[[User:LT|<code><span style="background:#FF8181">'''LT'''</span></code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|<sup>(Matthew 26:52)</sup>]]''''' Friday, 19:54, January 26, 2023 (EST) | ||
Revision as of 00:56, January 27, 2023
Internal evidence favoring Markan priority over Augustinian hypothesis?
When I was looking at the section in the Gospels about Jesus declaring Himself Lord of the Sabbath, I noticed that the placement is not consistent. Mark and Luke place it as follows: paralytic healed → Levi (aka Matthew) called → fasting question → Lord of the Sabbath → man with withered hand. Matthew's Gospel, OTOH, is different; the healing of the paralytic, the calling of Levi, and the posed question about fasting are placed in the same order as Mark and Luke (in Chapter 9 of the Gospel of Matthew), but the part about the Sabbath isn't mentioned until the start of Chapter 12! Let's evaluate this by separately supposing the validity of the Augustinian hypothesis and Markan priority, and whether the logic adds up:
- Assuming that the Gospel of Matthew was written first, then it's interesting that Mark and Luke, who subsequently would copy from Apostle Matthew, place the section about Jesus being Lord of the Sabbath, not only different from Matthew's placement, yet exactly the same way respective to preceding and succeeding sections. If Matthew's Gospel was written first, then it's plain unlikely that Mark and Luke would have independently and coincidentally felt like placing that part the exact same way; in order to still give credence to the Augustinian hypothesis, either Mark or Luke borrowed the other's work.
- Under Markan priority, it would go to follow that Mark's Gospel was written first, and Matthew and Luke subsequently copied from him, presumably in their own independent style; this therefore explains why Matthew and Luke's placement of the Sabbath section is different between those two Gospels. When Luke copied from Mark, he felt like retaining Mark's ordering, while when Matthew copied, he decided to place it in a different area respective to preceding and succeeding sections.
- Here's something interesting: Matthew's ordering, when one reads Chapters 11 through 12, indicates chronological succession. Mark and Luke, OTOH, don't.
Using Occam's razor, Markan priority seems like the most sensible conclusion based on the internal evidence. —LT (Matthew 26:52) Friday, 19:54, January 26, 2023 (EST)