[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Q and Papias
> That does not seem likely in view of the crudity of Mark's language and
> the implications of some of his terms--one has to explain why Mark would
> choose less elegant and in some cases more embarassing language; but it makes
> sense if one views it as Matthew's "upgrading" of Mark.
>
> David
But according to the other theory that is just the point-Mark's lack of
Greek ability is not indicative of his priority. Your statement assumes
that the abilities of the authors are evenly matched, and therefore it
makes no sense. But if we use Farmer (and personally I don't), then the
abilities of the authors is not equal, and so if Mark is using Matthew,
his use of Matthew is going to be conditioned on his ability to cut and
paste into his own work. If that ability is puerile, then the result is
puerile.
-Larry
Follow-Ups:
References: