Matthean priority

[jeremyp]

Equally likely is that Mark changed the more literary wording of Matthew and Luke into simple language.

Nope.

[Spud]

No it doesn't.

Ok, Matthew and Luke also seem to begin each narrative sentence with "And". The frequent use of "immediately" seems to be unique to Mark, though.

[Spud]

Sorry - it's me again.

Why would Mark say "he only used parables" if Mark knew about the Sermon on the Mount?

Clearly Mark meant while Jesus was teaching by the lake. Other times, Mark records Jesus teaching without parables, such as 7:1-23 (clean and unclean food); 10:1-12 (divorce); 12:35-40 (whose son is the Christ) - note v.38-39 of this section and compare with Matthew 23:

Mark 12:38 And in His teaching He was saying, “Beware of the scribes, desiring to walk about in robes, and greetings in the marketplaces, 39and first seats in the synagogues, and first places at the feasts; ”

Matthew 23 is the "seven woes", introduced by, "5...For they... enlarge their tassels, 6and they love the chief place at the banquets, and the first seats in the synagogues, 7and the greetings in the marketplaces,"

If Mark states that he is quoting from a larger collection of teaching, he must know what it is, which means that if we find such a collection, that must be where Mark is quoting from. Matthew 23 appears to be that teaching, as it contains three, possibly four, of the things Mark lists.

[jeremyp]

Sorry - it's me again.

Clearly Mark meant while Jesus was teaching by the lake.

...

If Mark states that he is quoting from a larger collection of teaching,...

But he contrasted the teachings by the lake with the teachings to the disciples, not his teachings to everybody else. IT invalidates your point somewhat.

 Furthermore, if he highlights occasions where Jesus used non parable teachings, it's strange he never highlights occasions where Jesus taught the Sermon on the Mount, or the Lord's Prayer.

You can wriggle as much as you like, but you can't get out of the fact that Mark never mentions either the Lord's Prayer or the Sermon on the Mount and yet these two preachings are central to Christian worship. The obvious explanation as to why he never mentions them is that he didn't know them. Therefore he wasn't copying Matthew.

Why is it so important to you that Matthew came first anyway? Would it make a jot of difference to your faith if it was the other way around?

[Spud]

But he contrasted the teachings by the lake with the teachings to the disciples, not his teachings to everybody else. IT invalidates your point somewhat.

Mark 7:14 And having summoned the crowd again, He was saying to them, “Listen to Me, all, and understand: 15There is nothing from outside the man entering into him which is able to defile him; but the things proceeding out of the man are the things defiling the man.”
-----------
Mark 10:1 And from there having risen up, He comes into the region of Judea, and beyond the Jordan. And again crowds come together to Him, and again, as He had been accustomed, He was teaching them.

2And the Pharisees, having approached, were demanding of Him if it is lawful for a husband to divorce a wife, testing Him.
------------
Mark 12:37 37David himself calls Him Lord. And from where is He his son?”

And the great crowd was listening to Him gladly.

38And in His teaching He was saying, “Beware of the scribes, desiring to walk about in robes
------------

So in Mark, Jesus teaches the crowd in parables and not in parables. My point still stands: In 4:2 and 12:38, Mark states that he is quoting from somewhere, and Matthew 13 and 23 complete the picture.

Furthermore, if he highlights occasions where Jesus used non parable teachings, it's strange he never highlights occasions where Jesus taught the Sermon on the Mount, or the Lord's Prayer.

As we see from Mark 12:38, Mark can sum up a large section of Matthew in a few sentences. He does exactly that in 11:22-25, where he sums up the Lord's prayer.

24Because of this I say to you, all things whatever praying, you also ask, believe that you receive, and it will be to you.

25And when you may stand praying, if you have anything against anyone, forgive it, so that your Father in the heavens also might forgive you your trespasses.”

Matthew 6:11 Our daily bread, grant us today.
12And forgive us our debts,
as we also have forgiven our debtors.

You can wriggle as much as you like, but you can't get out of the fact that Mark never mentions either the Lord's Prayer or the Sermon on the Mount and yet these two preachings are central to Christian worship. The obvious explanation as to why he never mentions them is that he didn't know them. Therefore he wasn't copying Matthew.

Why is it so important to you that Matthew came first anyway? Would it make a jot of difference to your faith if it was the other way around?

Something I haven't yet mentioned is that Matthew is concerned to show, with multiple references, how Jesus fulfilled the Old Testament. The fact that the material in Mat. 5 contains quotes from the Mosaic law and is taught on a mountain is a strong hint that Jesus is fulfilling the Mosaic law, also given on a mountain. Even the false prophets Jesus mentions in 7:15 are mentioned in Deuteronomy, suggesting that for Mat. 5-7, Jesus is the fulfillment of Moses.

Mark on the other hand is writing for Gentiles and is not as concerned with the Mosaic law as Matthew, who wrote for Jews. Thus he omits much of the material in Matthew.

[jeremyp]

Mark on the other hand is writing for Gentiles and is not as concerned with the Mosaic law as Matthew, who wrote for Jews. Thus he omits much of the material in Matthew.

So gentiles don't need to know the Sermon on the Mount or the Lords Prayer, but there do need to know more about pigs. Right.

Why is it so important to you that Matthew predates Mark?

[Spud]

Hi Jeremy,
You seem to fall back on Mark's missing Lord's prayer, whereas I see it as Mark cutting out, quoting in part or summarizing, the blocks of teaching from Matthew and Luke. I've set out many examples where I think it very unlikely that Matthew used Mark. It's still possible that I may be wrong about Mark using Matthew and Luke (and Peter) but I think that's the best hypothesis.

I don't need any of them to be first to believe that they corroborate each other and use different eyewitnesses so that we can get a more full picture of the events.

[Roses]

Hi Jeremy,
You seem to fall back on Mark's missing Lord's prayer, whereas I see it as Mark cutting out, quoting in part or summarizing, the blocks of teaching from Matthew and Luke. I've set out many examples where I think it very unlikely that Matthew used Mark. It's still possible that I may be wrong about Mark using Matthew and Luke (and Peter) but I think that's the best hypothesis.

I don't need any of them to be first to believe that they corroborate each other and use different eyewitnesses so that we can get a more full picture of the events.

So called eyewitnesses who were probably dead when the gospels were concocted. Eyewitness testimonies are often way off the mark, especially when relating the less than credible events attributed to the long dead, Jesus.

[jeremyp]

Hi Jeremy,
You seem to fall back on Mark's missing Lord's prayer

What do you mean "fall back"? That would imply we've moved beyond it, but you haven't provided an adequate explanation for its non appearance yet.

whereas I see it as Mark cutting out, quoting in part or summarizing, the blocks of teaching from Matthew and Luke.

But your hypothesis doesn't make sense. You are arguing that Mark cut out a major piece of Christian thinking in favour of more detail about pigs.

I don't need any of them to be first to believe that they corroborate each other and use different eyewitnesses so that we can get a more full picture of the events.

Matthew and Luke basically copied Mark almost word for word. Of course they corroborate each other.

[Spud]

But your hypothesis doesn't make sense. You are arguing that Mark cut out a major piece of Christian thinking in favour of more detail about pigs.

I heard a sermon (online) about the withered fig tree in Mark 11. To my surprise the speaker said that Jesus' words about prayer in Mark 11:22-25 do in fact embody the thinking in the Lord's Prayer. The idea is that the fig tree represented unfruitful Israel, and the tree's withering represented judgment on Israel for that unfruitfulness. 'This mountain' Jesus was thinking of was the temple mount, so he was also teaching the disciples to pray for the removal of obstruction to the spread of the gospel, which was the Jewish religious system signified by the temple. This is the same as praying for God's kingdom to come and his will to be done (Mt 5:10). This kind of prayer and also prayer for provision for daily needs would require faith. Lastly Mark appends the section with the bit about forgiving others, same as in Mt 5:12,14.

Regarding the Gaderene demoniac. If Matthew had been copying Mark, he must have: changed the location Gerasenes to Gaderenes; changed one demoniac to two; omitted any mention of chains, cutting himself, the name of the man and the number of pigs, besides other details.

The more simple explanation is that Mark copied Luke, whose account is very similar to his, and added the number of pigs, possibly a detail provided to Mark by Peter.

Mark

[Spud]

So called eyewitnesses who were probably dead when the gospels were concocted. Eyewitness testimonies are often way off the mark, especially when relating the less than credible events attributed to the long dead, Jesus.

Have a watch of this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5Ylt1pBMm8

[Roses]

Have a watch of this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5Ylt1pBMm8

I can't log on to that, but even if I could I very much doubt it would change my take on the topic

[Walter]

I can't log on to that, but even if I could I very much doubt it would change my take on the topic

Lr

I did . It's more wishy-washy than widow Twanky !

[Gordon]

Have a watch of this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5Ylt1pBMm8

Had a quick look - since very early on we get the laughable Lewis 'trilemma', I didn't bother after that.