Fatigue in the Synoptics
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 19293526 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Mark Goodacre (0000-0003-2155-3766, University of Birmingham, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1998 |
| Volume | 44 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 45-58 |
| Publication date | 1998-01-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | New Testament Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0028-6885 • E-ISSN: 1469-8145 |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1017/s0028688500016349 |
| OpenAlex | W2051706664 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
| References cited | 3 |
Matthew and Luke sometimes write versions of Marcan pericopae in which they make initial changes, only to lapse into the thought or wording of the original. Clear examples are Matt 14.1–12 ∥Mark 6.14–29 (Death of John); Matt 8.1–4 ∥ Mark 1.40–5 (Leper); Matt 12.46–50 ∥ Mark 3.31–5 (Mother and Brothers); Luke 8.4–15 ∥ Mark 4.1–20 (Sower); Luke 5.17–26 ∥ Mark 2.1–12 (Paralytic) and Luke 9.10–17 ∥ Mark 6.30–44 (Five Thousand), all of which make good sense on the theory of Marcan Priority. ‘Fatigue’ may also suggest a solution to the problem of double tradition material: Luke 9.1–6 (cf. Matt 10.5–15, Mission Charge) and Luke 19.11–27 ∥ Matt 25.14–30 (Talents) both make good sense on the theory of Luke’s use of Matthew
Art history · Theology · Biblical Studies and Interpretation · History · Pentecostalism and Christianity Studies · Philosophy
| Citations per year | 0.67 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2023 - 2025 (3) |
| Highly cited | No |