[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Q and Papias
On Thu, 27 Oct 1994, Larry Swain wrote:
> That depends on whether you see the birth narrative as "tacked on" or as
> a piece of the whole cloth of the gospel. I don't think we can seperate
> out the birth story as some sort of detachable prologue, and say that the
> "main" gospel to start with shared Markan material.
What is to prevent us assuming precisely that as a hypothesis? When I
first began textual study I was struck with two strange things--how the
main body of text in Matthew and Luke is essentially Markan, and how
greatly the chief portions not shared with Mark differ from one
another--i.e. the birth stories and the resurrection stories. It is
difficult, in fact, not to think of Mark as the text proper, to which
Matthew and Luke have each added prologue and epilogue (as well as much
variation within the core text, which indicates an additional source or
sources). This is, of course, an
oversimplification, but even the mythic nature of the birth stories would
seem to argue for a period of elaboration later than that of Mark.
David
References: