The "Reconstructed Mark" and the Reconstruction of Q: A Valid Analogy?
Described as a "thought experiment" by a number of scholars, Mark's Gospel as reconstructed exclusively from its reception by Matthew and Luke has been repeatedly advanced as a challenge to the reconstruction of Q in recent decades. This essay analyzes the "Reconstructed Mark&quo...
| Published in: | Biblical theology bulletin |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Sage
[2020]
|
| In: |
Biblical theology bulletin
|
| Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains: | B
Q
/ Reconstruction
/ Rekonstruktionsmethode
/ Synoptic problem
/ Methodology
|
| IxTheo Classification: | HC New Testament |
| Further subjects: | B
two-document hypothesis
B Lukan doublets B Mark-Q overlaps B reconstructed Mark B reconstruction of Q |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Parallel Edition: | Electronic
|
| Summary: | Described as a "thought experiment" by a number of scholars, Mark's Gospel as reconstructed exclusively from its reception by Matthew and Luke has been repeatedly advanced as a challenge to the reconstruction of Q in recent decades. This essay analyzes the "Reconstructed Mark" argument, finding it to form a poorly calibrated analogy for the Q document. It will be shown that Matthew and Luke treat Q, which is a sayings collection, differently from the sayings of Jesus in Mark's Gospel, which are already valued by them more highly than Mark's narrative. Further arguments in support of the feasibility of Q's reconstruction and the attainability of its text will also be provided. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1945-7596 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Biblical theology bulletin
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1177/0146107920913793 |