The “Reconstructed Mark” and the Reconstruction of Q
A Valid Analogy
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21453401 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Olegs Andrejevs (0000-0003-4849-1040, Olegs Andrejevs, Ph.D. (Loyola University, Chicago), is Adjunct Instructor at Loyola University, Chicago in the Department of Theology, 1032 W. Sheridan Road, Crown Center, Chicago IL 60660.. He is the author of Apocalypticism in the Synoptic Sayings Source (WUNT 2/499), Mohr Siebeck, 2019., corresponding author) |
| Year | 2020 |
| Volume | 50 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 83-91 |
| Publication date | 2020-05-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Biblical Theology Bulletin Journal of Bible and Culture (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0146-1079 • E-ISSN: 1945-7596 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/0146107920913793 |
| OpenAlex | W3013830267 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 24 |
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
Analogy · Argument (complex analysis) · Art · Epistemology · Gospel · Linguistics · Literature · Narrative · Theology · Archaeology and Historical Studies · Biblical Studies and Interpretation · Computer Science · Historical and Linguistic Studies · Philosophy
| Highly cited | No |
|---|