- 2 weeks ago
This episode originally aired May 14, 2024 on youtube.com/vocesanticae
It presents Mark's signal tracing and data flow mapping of the cascading traditions of the death of John the Baptist (Jn1 3.24; Lk2 3.19-20; Mt2 14.3-12; Mk3 6.17-29). Presentation based on First Gospel LODLIB v4.05, released May 14, 2024 and available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3927056
Audio-visual content © 2024 Clavis Consulting, LLC (Kansas). All rights reserved. Thumbnail © 2024 K. Lance Lotharp. Used with permission.
It presents Mark's signal tracing and data flow mapping of the cascading traditions of the death of John the Baptist (Jn1 3.24; Lk2 3.19-20; Mt2 14.3-12; Mk3 6.17-29). Presentation based on First Gospel LODLIB v4.05, released May 14, 2024 and available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3927056
Audio-visual content © 2024 Clavis Consulting, LLC (Kansas). All rights reserved. Thumbnail © 2024 K. Lance Lotharp. Used with permission.
Category
📚
LearningTranscript
00:01hello this is the 10th episode of gospel open data science i'm your host mark g bilby
00:06if you have caught it jack has jack bull my co-host has given a introduction to a relaunch
00:13that we are doing jack marcus vinson and i have content on the channel this last weekend we
00:20recorded about three hours worth of q a in depth about marcus's reconstruction of the apostolos
00:27which is marcion's collection paul's letters which is now with the publisher and jack and i decided
00:33that we're going to sort of split out the programming where some of it is focused on
00:39marcion and early church fathers and might have guests and such and then wednesday sessions will
00:46be reserved for my work on data science and my reconstruction of marcion's gospel and the sources
00:54of marcion's gospel and its later um recipients so today i'm going to look uh particularly at one
01:01passage i i opened it up to some of my patrons on patreon to um suggest passages and one of
01:08my
01:08most uh ardent supporters uh just recommended i go with a passage i thought uh would be enjoyable
01:15and that would exemplify um some of the method that i've worked out in this uh tracing of signals
01:22um across the gospels so um let me go ahead and open that um and please subscribe to our channel
01:30uh we're up to 617 subscribers i think we'll get a lot more so we have a lot of uh
01:35a lot more content
01:36about to roll out um i've just uploaded to zenodo which is a open science repository based out of europe
01:43uh a new version of my uh major book on marcion's gospel which i call a lodlib linked open data
01:52living
01:52informational book so you can find version 4.05 there and um it's not the entirety of the book
02:01i've split it out now into five different volumes so the most the two most recent uploads only include
02:08volume two which is the synopsis so if you want to see the content in volumes one three four five
02:14uh you'll need to go back to version 4.04 or 4.03 one of those versions where you can
02:22see the proofs
02:23for instance and extensive tables and some data visualizations and different kinds of things
02:28um you know as the project has evolved i've uh submitted portions of the book to journals and
02:35they've been peer reviewed and published through journals and then some of it is just so extensive
02:40and so complex that it doesn't really fit into any traditional scholarly monograph series or any
02:47traditional journal publishing um it's what what i would consider to be a virtual research environment
02:53where it's uh it's open science it's um you know uh more more content and more complex content that
03:01can fit in a traditional book page so um today we'll be focusing in on a passage i think is
03:07is particularly interesting um in a previous episode i had looked at the temptation of jesus
03:13small version of it and the gospel according to mark significantly longer version of it in the gospel
03:20according to matthew significantly longer version the gospel according to luke and i mentioned that
03:25with marcian's gospel that text isn't there there is no temptation and that's attested by various church
03:31fathers and that's actually a really helpful indication of what is not in q so traditional
03:37ideas of q are that the temptation was there marcian's gospel lacks it and because marcian's gospel
03:44if you look really carefully at the patterns throughout it you can see that it's using two sources
03:49uh a source that aligns very closely in style and content and sequence with mark and then another
03:57gospel that looks quite similar to what scholars have traditionally reconstructed for q as a succession
04:03of ethical teachings of jesus focused on the poor and on the liberation of slaves um and the depiction of
04:11jesus is an aesop like figure um so this passage that we'll be looking at today about the death of
04:18john
04:18the baptist um it is not in marcian's gospel uh marcian's gospel does mention john being thrown into
04:26prison but it doesn't have any detailed narrative about the death of john um tertullian expresses
04:32surprise uh you know or astonishment or bewilderment in his commentary of marcian's gospel that john
04:38appears so late what we would consider to be chapter seven of of luke where john is asking whether jesus
04:46is
04:46the christ or not um that's the first instance in marcian's gospel the mention of john the baptist
04:52so you could say john the baptist is there he's he's not portrayed necessarily as a negative figure
04:58in marcian's text certainly later people and scholars some scholars have argued that but
05:03there's not anything necessarily that's in fact jesus speaks in a laudatory way of john as the greatest
05:09um of those born of women uh but may see a differentiation in terms of john as reflecting
05:16a prior era of the prophets and jesus is reflecting a new era or moment or age of of history
05:23uh but
05:25anyways marcian's gospel doesn't have any any story about the death of john the baptist and i think this
05:29is a great point where we can see that um the later the stratum uh the more involved the story
05:36is uh
05:37uh traditional no you know scholars traditionally uh because they're they are uh i'd say prejudiced
05:44that these texts were created by single authors which they whether they are making a historical
05:50claim or not uh by calling these authors matthew mark luke and john they fall into the habit of
05:57foisting a hagiographical framework on all these texts so the idea is you know a very variety of scholars
06:04even quite you know methodologically might what might be considered liberal scholars will assume
06:10that luke was written in one go or mark was written in one go or matthew was written in one
06:14go and that
06:15they were all written by one person and these people essentially just don't know how to do data
06:20modeling that's essentially what it boils down to by starting with those hagiographical
06:25concepts and the presumption which is unfounded of a single author and a single voice in these texts
06:32even if you might have more than one source the presumption is still a single voice and that
06:36simply doesn't hold up under careful analysis of these texts all of these texts have multiple
06:41strata not just john which many scholars would say but mark has multiple strata at least two likely
06:48three matthew has at least two highly distinctive strata and luke clearly and actually scientifically has
06:55two distinct strata which you can see in comparing marcian's text with canonical luke there is simply
07:01a different voice that is present and overarching and doing the edit editing or redaction of canonical
07:07luke so by splitting luke you can start to get a handle on how to split the other gospels correctly
07:15how to split matthew into its two major strata or redactions in history how to split mark into its two
07:22or
07:22three redactions and even how to split john into its two or three redactions but this would align with
07:28other uh pre you know prior scholarly depictions of uh the gospel according to john so if if we model
07:35the data flows correctly which i've done here uh really for the first time in history um because i'm
07:43strictly looking at this as data and trying to map data flows and not using hagiography notions of saints
07:49writing these texts as the grounded grounding or framework for doing this you can see that the
07:56data flow it's pretty clearly expanding or cascading over time uh where in marcian's gospel which i call
08:04luke 1 lk1 proto luke uh there's no story of john's death there's simply no interest in any kind of
08:12narrative about how john died um there is a very basic mention of john going to prison
08:19in the first stratum of the gospel according to john which i would put around the early 100s
08:25it's very dionysian as dennis mcdonald has talked about this particular stratum
08:30um but as i mentioned before marcian's gospel does have john being in prison and then sending an inquiry to
08:37jesus but there's no clear mention of the death of john the baptist so uh the early stratum of john
08:44is basically what is closest to marcian's gospel um which again i think was probably written in the 80s
08:52uh not long after the jewish war um but you know before other other kinds of events before plenty
08:59uh started uh killing people called christianoi or messianics if you look at luke uh it's the second
09:07most developed of these stories um within this continuum um it mentions herod uh it mentions uh a
09:17reason for um herod killing john the baptist and locking him up in prison as it says um it actually
09:24doesn't specifically mention the death of john the baptist in this context so you could say it's
09:30it's a fairly simple narrative herod is uh described as a tetrarch we find this prior in luke
09:383.1 the word tetrarch being applied to herod as well as other rulers of the time luke has a
09:45tendency
09:45as many scholars have talked about before of conflating herod into sort of a single evil character
09:52it's kind of a conflation or a caricature of herod and um and then a motivation tied to herodian so
09:58canonical luke is reflecting some knowledge of josephus but uh not going far beyond what josephus
10:06says josephus mentions john the baptist mentions john the baptist being put in prison mentions him
10:11being killed but he doesn't mention the the way the manner by which he was killed specifically the
10:18the beheading there's no mention of the the beheading of john the baptist in josephus's
10:23antiquity so you could say luke is um sort of the most simple narrative about the death of john the
10:29baptist canonical luke matthew expands it and you can see this in very specific ways of uh expanding
10:36just adding new verbs adding new concepts and if you just picture each one of these things in your mind
10:41it's easier to see this so you know in luke there's no for instance direct speech john never
10:47speaks directly to herod he is reproved by him but it's indirect speech it's not direct speech
10:54in matthew we get direct speech john actually speaks directly to herod and in mark john speaks directly
11:02to herod as well using the same words that are in matthew but expanding it uh you can also find
11:07things
11:08like you know uh herod locked john up in prison it mentions reproving but matthew expands it by adding
11:15this laying hold or essentially arresting arresting binding him and putting him in prison so there's
11:23just more layers there's more there's more verbs there's more mental images um and then when you get
11:29to mark it's not only that herod has john uh arrested uh he's doing so through proxies so there's a
11:38very
11:38clear reference apostellas um in this the the participle basically puts an emphasis on the fact
11:47that herod himself is responsible but that he enacted this through proxies and we find that emphasis on
11:53proxies um throughout canonical luke i would even speculate that this these portions of matthew and
12:00and mark may have been redacted by the redactor of canonical luke because we see a lot of interesting
12:06overlaps between stylistic stylistically distinctive elements of canonical luke that are actually quite
12:13consistently reflected here in canonical matthew and canonical mark including for instance the use of
12:19proxies particularly by rulers to carry out specific tasks we have um a a further elaboration of the
12:30motivation for herod killing john the baptist basically an explanation tagged on to the story
12:36so you know again traditional narrative is mark was written first and and then somehow john just greatly
12:44simplified mark and matthew somewhat simplified mark and luke restated and simplified mark it just doesn't
12:52make much sense if you're thinking uh i would say if you're if you're just simply doing data flow modeling
12:58and you don't start with the assumption that mark was written in a single go by one person early
13:04if you don't start with that prejudicial really a priori unfounded assumption this is clearly mark is
13:12clearly the most involved the most elaborate elaborate text and um usually now the kind of big fish
13:20stories uh the more involved the more detail the more expanded um the later the story is so it makes
13:29a
13:29heck of a lot of sense here to say that mark is based on matthew and luke it doesn't make
13:33much sense to
13:34say that luke is based on mark it doesn't make much sense to say matthew is based on mark but
13:40just
13:40happen to leave aside certain things certain explanations chop down the speech act of of
13:46john to herod these sorts of things it makes much more sense to model the data in this way and
13:52then
13:52if we scroll down to the next part of the story which involves herodias the uh the daughter of um
14:01of um well herodias being the wife of uh philip that herod married and then the daughter of
14:08herodias dancing we get basically an elaborate court tale or court fable um it's the kind of
14:14thing that we find in daniel um where we're just we're witnessing a court intrigue where you know
14:21there's a feast there's a festival occasion um but we have just a lot going on here we have um
14:29herod uh motivation and uh matthew herod all of a sudden has motivation to kill john
14:36and yet conflicting emotions he's afraid of john because they held him to be a prophet by the way
14:42i'm i'm doing fresh translations of all of these things and the translations are somewhat wooden and
14:47that's intentional uh because i want it to stick as close as possible to the syntax and uh the word
14:54order of uh the underlying greek text so i'm with all of these i've now completed through chapter three
15:00which is up uploaded to zenoto i have parallel english translations to accompany the greek
15:06as well as these little little signal labels so if it says mk3c that's a clear signal from the third
15:14stratum of mark which essentially here is a signal that we don't find in matthew or other other gospels
15:22so the idea that um that there was somebody who wished to kill jesus that's consistent between the
15:29two but the motive is actually where in matthew it's uh attributed to herod he's the one with the motive
15:35to kill john the baptist in uh mark it gets deferred or um basically pinned on a woman so a
15:43woman is to
15:44blame it's kind of a jimmy buffett moment but in reverse where the uh as the later the stratum the
15:51more women are demonized in these texts the more uh sort of proto-orthodoxy takes hold in these texts
15:57the more patriarchal it becomes so where herod's a bad guy in matthew herodias it's really a woman
16:03who's to blame for the death of john the baptist and mark again that doesn't make much sense if mark
16:08is written first then like you know the then the the woman is not the one responsible when it comes
16:14to
16:14matthew he blames the guy instead and then in luke there's no motive or there is a motive but there's
16:19just
16:19no clear elaboration there's no court tale all these kinds of things so this far more extensive story
16:25which is not in luke this is very likely a late story a mid-second century story about um jesus
16:33and
16:33john the baptist it likely has no historical value whatsoever um it's not anchored at all in the
16:41historical account that josephus gives of john um being an insurrectionist essentially and killed for
16:47being an insurrectionist it may lift up john though as royalty or as a serious political threat because
16:54um de decapitation in roman society at that time was often reserved for the royals
16:59or uh you know members of the senate or what have you so cicero famously was was beheaded um at
17:07that
17:07time so maybe maybe there's an implicit depiction of john as sort of a new cicero um an ethical a
17:14popular ethical and moral teacher um to the people something of a philosopher uh so this this goes
17:20together i think very much with the depiction of jesus as a philosopher the depiction of paul as a
17:25philosopher in acts and the canonical luke in acts um and then the second stratum of john also depicting
17:33jesus as a new socrates basically these mid-second century strata in the gospels have a concern which is
17:41around the time of justin martyr who really is the first to talk about christianity as a philosophy
17:46right not as a cult not as a just a ritual system but as a philosophy as something that would
17:51be
17:52recognized in the greco-roman world as a philosophical movement and school concurrent with
17:58that with justin martyr essentially you have these elaborate attempts to depict jesus paul john the baptist
18:06and other figures as as if they were had been philosophers or sophists famous public rators or
18:13speakers um who and you know in this case needed to be killed so we have a lot of elaboration
18:20here
18:20you know all this stuff in matthew again not in luke so we have a court tale a setting that
18:26it was herod's
18:26birthday we have herodias um the daughter of herodias dancing we have herod making an oath a rash oath
18:35that's that's a theme that comes up in in greek and roman literature but it's also known in the
18:40septuagint um from jephthah for instance uh making a rash oath or samson so this is a sign of a
18:49a foolish ruler who who makes an oath and um it's one that he has trouble keeping um makes promises
18:57essentially that he can't keep and um then there's sort of a seduction here that happens and uh herod uh
19:05is sort of coerced you might say into though something he probably wanted to do but it gives
19:11him an excuse to do do this thing that he already wanted to do but maybe didn't have the initiative
19:16or wouldn't take the initiative to do to have john the baptist killed and then there's even something
19:22like bodily devotion to the corpse of john the baptist again not an emphasis at all in canonical luke
19:29not an emphasis at all in uh gospel according to john certainly not an emphasis in marcion's
19:35gospel this is again probably a later development mid-second century development where there's a
19:40concern with something like an emerging kind of cult of the saints around early christian christian
19:45legendary figures um including john the baptist as he's held up as sort of this legendary
19:51um you know elaborate martyr one might also think of the story of judith in the um in the septuagint
20:00uh because it involves the beheading of a man but in in this case holophanes but in this case
20:06the roles would be reversed where you know instead of a jewish heroine beheading the babylonian general
20:13and you know putting his head on a pike and scaring the babylonians or the assyrians it kind of is
20:19mixing them up in the story of judith um here it's a woman requesting the head on a plate and
20:25then it is
20:26it is uh it is given there are proxies herod does act through proxies it's called he's called the king
20:34this fits royal court tales um again that tend to be highly fictional stories that we have in esther and
20:39daniel for instance short stories we have lots of different court tales between the second century bc
20:46and and first and second century ce um and then but we just get a lot more detail in mark
20:53and again
20:53it doesn't make a lot of sense that matthew if it's based on mark would just remove a lot of
20:58these
20:59really well integrated bits like that it's herodias rather than herod who was the one who was really
21:06preoccupied with john the baptist she it's her motive that is responsible um she is not able
21:13it's it's it's a third person verb it could be masculine or feminine but pretty clearly in
21:18in mark here it's that she was not able to kill him um there's a depiction of of uh john
21:26the baptist's
21:27righteous that might echo uh bits of josephus in his depiction of john the baptist so again that
21:34points probably to a setting after the antiquities of josephus for the writing of this portion of
21:39mark's gospel where earlier stuff doesn't seem much dependent on josephus the bits and mark that are
21:45dependent on the antiquities probably favor uh you know early but more likely a mid-second century
21:51date um we have days of celebration uh not just the birthday festivities uh we have the mention of
21:59neighbors um i think what looks like that's i'm not sure why i underlined it because i tried just to
22:07underline stuff that oh oh okay well maybe it's maybe i just need to search
22:19okay i'm not seeing neighbor come up there so maybe that's just incorrect to underline need to fix that
22:30oh it probably should be relatives actually guess anyways yep okay well i'll fix that i make mistakes
22:38sometimes in my translation i need to fix them so he's with his relatives but then also we have
22:43additional guests uh quite an elaboration in um in mark where it's it's not just relatives but the great men
22:52um who are sort of underneath him the kill the arcs or uh the commanders of a thousand uh these
22:59that's
23:00a traditional title for um members of the tribunal class in roman society um so you know like again
23:08hagiographical legend would say mark was written in rome in 70 and that's why it has these latinisms
23:15but much more likely as canonical mark was written in the mid-second century it just goes through these
23:20elaborate you know elaborate extensions of the story that was prior to it where herod has has guests
23:28and um you know there's an elaborate list of of these people and then likely including them as
23:34dependents actually which is on a kano kano minoi um which could mean people who recline that's usually
23:41how it's translated in most english translation but it's also a technical term for people who are
23:46dependents of a royal person basically um you know a herod would be the patron uh sort of the political
23:54and royal patron of um these underlings um who are you know upper class in the society at the time
24:01so that whole elaboration doesn't make much sense that luke just entirely omits all this intrigue and
24:08court drama which is very typical for luke you know throughout that gospel that matthew downsizes
24:14it and just like removes all the different elaborations of people from the guest list
24:19um we even have uh herod giving an oath but in mark we have herod giving an oath with direct
24:29speech
24:30then we see the same sort of tendency or trajectory where like the early versions of stories
24:36you know simply state that something happened um and may infer that there was some kind of speech
24:42but they don't actually elaborate what the speech was the later the stratum the more vivid and elaborate
24:48the speech acts are um the more sort of historicizing fiction writing is happening uh to to give characters
24:57motivation in this case to shift motivation or uh in this case also to uh give extended speech acts
25:07um so early you know marcion's gospel for instance doesn't really has herod saying a minimal amount
25:12during the trial of jesus has pilot speaking minimally during the trial of jesus but in all the canonical
25:19gospels there's much more elaborate speech going on at the trial of jesus
25:23um by royal officials by bystanders by followers of jesus by jesus himself right so elaborate speech
25:33acts especially if you have a story where you have no speech act or just an implicit speech act
25:40when you have extensive speech acts given it's probably a good indication that you're looking at a
25:45later stratum within that text we even have dialogue we have an exitus and ready tos here in mark which
25:52is very typical of canonical luke that the daughter of herodias leaves the room apparently because only
25:59the men are in the room i guess right this also goes together in canonical mark we see a lot
26:04of vivid
26:05descriptions of household settings of courts of rooms and people entering and exiting rooms people entering and
26:13exiting through roofs again all that architectural detail and all that staging you might say that's
26:19absent from marcion's gospel again early gospels weren't really so interested about depicting all of the
26:27dramatic detail costuming gestures movement of characters motivations of characters dramatic soliloquies
26:38um marcion's gospel largely doesn't have those things because it's just not interested in
26:43sort of a literary fictional um retelling of these stories so um even this mention of haste that's
26:52very typical canonical luke this is one of the reasons that i would think that this chunk of mark
26:57actually might have been redacted by the editor of canonical luke because they're just a lot of
27:03what we might consider typically lucan features that are aren't actually in luke at all um chronological
27:10references reference to speed or haste extended dialogue um that there's a little correction that
27:17needs to be made here motivation that herod's full of grief he's conflicted you might say so it's more of
27:25a an interest with what politicians are are thinking or doing sort of a humanizing of them
27:30um and uh and then also sort of the political system of which they're a part um and then uh
27:39a
27:40focus on honor and shame as being a concern of the royals uh we also have additional characters in mark
27:46like an executioner so no mention of executioner and matthew so again like matthew depended on mark
27:53but just removed the executioner removed herod's feelings removed the mention of haste removed the
28:00entrance and exit of the daughter of herodias it doesn't make any sense that matthew in this case
28:06downsizes or bridges because this is not an abridgment what you see in mark and matthew is
28:11not an abridgment of mark it's a different story it's a simpler story it's a story with fewer characters
28:17it's a story with less or implicit dialogue it's a story with less or implicit emotion if if if it
28:24exists
28:24at all um so you know abridgers don't take out characters abridgers don't remove emotion right
28:32abridgers just state portions of the story abridgers don't downsize or remove the guest list
28:39it just doesn't make any sense mark in this case is a mid-second this is a mid-second century
28:44account
28:45that we find in mark's gospel and then the demonizing of women this again goes together
28:50with traditional greco-roman stories it goes together with the story of the iliad and the
28:55odyssey of you know woman helen being the one responsible for conflict or um you know political
29:02intrigue being centered on a female figure um the veneration of the body again even small little
29:10details so you know matt mark was written first and in mark's gospel and in mark um the disciples of
29:17john the baptist hear about the story uh hear about john the baptist being killed and then they go and
29:23take his corpse honor it by placing it in a tomb well and in matthew they don't hear why would
29:32matthew
29:32remove why would the author of that stratum and matthew remove um you know just that little incidental
29:39detail about you know hearing well that this goes together with that traditional emphasis that we see in
29:46canonical luke especially about hearing and seeing uh sort of you know visual or auditory uh participles
29:56being what explains how an action happened uh sort of a perspectival view where the care you see
30:04through the lens of the characters um or you know there's there's a continuity or seamlessness
30:12in the action where things don't just happen it's that they happen in a proper sort of sequence that's
30:18causal so you know it's not just that john the baptist is killed gap there we might say there's a
30:26filling of the gap and that we find this all over the place in the hebrew bible uh where you
30:32know one
30:32version of a story of david for instance doesn't have certain details there's an implicit gap
30:37like well how did you know how did john the baptist followers find out about his killing well they
30:45heard about it so some report came to them that's a gap that is filled in by canonical mark no
30:52no reason
30:53doesn't make much sense that matthew takes out that little detail that fills a gap that essentially was
30:59left there in the story of canonical matthew so again the pro the the pattern we see through throughout
31:06these texts if we actually are interested in modeling data flow is to look at the expansion
31:13of stories the addition of characters motivation for characters additional and expansive vocabulary
31:20especially if it shows sort of more intellectual sophistication or political connection uh there's a
31:28there's an elevation in status and socioeconomic status when we look across this there's a matching of
31:33conventions we find in greco-roman drama for instance with haste um you know the if servants
31:41or underlings in greco-roman drama move with haste that's just a common trope so there's just there's
31:47just a much more elaborate detail that doesn't make sense for the earliest account right so the earliest
31:53account gives all this elaborate detail all this dramatic detail and then it gets progressively or
31:58completely removed by the later texts by canonical luke and canonical matthew those folks basically
32:04who think that way just have it completely backwards and upside down and it's because
32:10they're starting with largely because they're starting with the prejudicial understanding that
32:13marcion's gospel is late and that it's an abridgment if you just understand marcion's gospel probably
32:19contains reflections of most of our early earliest traditions that we find in gospel and gospel-like texts
32:27then it's pretty clear that these chunks of matthew and mark often which are not in marcion's gospel
32:33and some of which are not even in canonical luke are uh mid-second century redactions so that's that for
32:41for today i can go into more detail but um as i mentioned i'm i'm doing english translations now for
32:47all these things so you know i started doing i did a lot of the greek uh greek textual mapping
32:52or signals
32:52mapping going back three and four years so this has been out here for scholars to look at and you
32:59know scholars don't want to look at it but you know i guess that's up to them but i think
33:04this is pretty
33:05significant in terms of a legitimate scientifically legitimate modeling of data flows um for the first
33:12time across these texts so it's out there and it'd be interesting to you know engage other scholars in a
33:19conversation about whether this is viable but if it makes sense to you if you think this is legitimate
33:25then you know read more about it but ask your teachers ask your professors is is bill be on the
33:32right track is he on to something here with this signal tracing method triangulating signals across the
33:38gospels looking for direct and uh bypassed and then synthesized uh traditions so in canonical matthew here we
33:48find uh clear synthesis of i'm sorry in canonical mark here we find clear synthesis of elements from matthew and
33:55luke
33:58so what makes much more sense that mark here is latest because it's the most synthesized it's the most
34:04synthetic it combines elements that are in luke and in matthew it takes elements in matthew that sound
34:10like they probably come from luke but then get expanded and then appear in the methan form in mark
34:16um but again the overall trajectory if if you just took the names away if you took luke mark and
34:23matthew away
34:24and you just looked at these words as data most people i think would come to the conclusion that
34:30if if they're the data is missing entirely it's probably an early reflection if it's very simple data
34:37it's probably earlier in history if it's a little more complex probably next if it's even more
34:43complex probably next and if it's the most complex the most synthesized especially if it's picking up
34:49elements from two prior strata that are distinctive and then fusing them together which is what i've shown
34:55here right you have elements that are you find in in luke and then elements that you find in matthew
35:02and then
35:02they're they're combined um in this in this text so uh yep that'll that'll do it for the day uh
35:09if you
35:10have um questions or thoughts or suggestions about future passages that i should focus in on um you're
35:15welcome to do that as i mentioned i finished the translating of uh the first three chapters into
35:20english but quite a bit more actually there's a lot of chapters four five and six that i've translated
35:25now into english in these parallel kind of passages so i hope this makes the translations make it a lot
35:31more useful to a much broader audience and um you know just get a broader public uh really thinking
35:38about this and engaging with this work all right thank you very much for your time and interest and i
35:43hope you have a good rest your day thanks bye
Comments