Ancient Hebrew Poetry

A Comparison of Doubly and Triply Attested Synoptic Tradition (Part 5)

This post covers Mark 1:26-27 // Luke 4:36-37. The results of this 5-part series are summarized in concluding remarks at the end of this post.

A Comparison of Doubly and Triply Attested Synoptic Tradition (Part 3)

The unit considered here is a stumbling block to proponents of Matthean priority. Mark 1:21-22 / Luke 4:31-32 seem to reflect a base text the second half of which Matthew reutilized for the purpose of providing a fitting response to the Sermon on the Mount (Matt 7:28-29).

A Comparison of Doubly and Triply Attested Synoptic Tradition (Part 2)

The work of synoptic analysis is akin to the work of text criticism. Many of the same rules apply. This post covers Mark 1:19-20 // Matthew 4:21-22.

A Comparison of Doubly and Triply Attested Synoptic Tradition (Part 1)

At the bottom of this post, the extant traditions and a reconstructed source are given in extenso. This post covers Mark 1:16-18 // Matthew 4:18-20.

A Hypothetical Common Source of Matthew, Mark, and Luke

The Synoptic Problem is to New Testament studies what the problem of the sources and composition of the Primary History (Genesis through 2 Kings) is to the study of the Hebrew Bible: an intellectual adventure of the first order. If you are unable to describe the theories for sale and evaluate their strengths and weaknesses, if concepts like the Covenant Code, D, P and H Torah; the double tradition, the triple tradition, the Minor Agreements, and Q are unknown quantities to you, you cannot claim to be a specialist in the fields.