Disagreements of ach Evangelist with the Minor Close Agreements of the Other Two

Downing, F. Gerald

doi:10.2143/etl.80.4.542107

Cited by 2 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…15 These particular passages do not document the procedure that retains our interest: FH Luke’s frequent unpicking of Matthew’s Markan material. 16 Nevertheless, on four occasions Downing’s 2004 list supplies new instances of unpicking that meet the condition just mentioned and are not classified as Mark–Q overlaps by the usual 2DH authorities. 17 These instances lend support to Watson’s more extensive tabulation of the phenomenon outside the boundaries of the 2DH’s Mark–Q overlap texts.…”

Section: Watson and Fh Luke’s Unpickingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[1-]34 and relocation to a new context. Eve (2021: 141) also overlooks what I have earlier described as the third type of unpicking, as he discusses Downing’s (2004: 464) No. xi (see n. 17 above).…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

“… 4. The number of studies simply presupposing the 2DH remains very high. Here, I list only the notable post-2000 publications dedicated to demonstrating and developing the hypothesis: Foster 2003; Kloppenborg 2003, 2007, 2015, 2019; Downing 2004, 2017; Derrenbacker 2005, 2011; Burkett 2009; Kirk 2011a, 2011b, 2016, 2017; Tuckett 2018; Chang 2019. …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“… 19. Downing’s (2004: 465) attention is directed to the parable’s disarticulation from its Markan context in Matthew rather than in-parable unpicking (contra Tuckett 2018: 136-37). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“… 20. Tuckett’s (2018: 136-37) attention is directed to in-parable unpicking rather than the parable’s disarticulation from its Markan context in Matthew (contra Downing 2004: 465). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

FH Luke’s ‘Unpicking’: Some Observations on Francis Watson’s Recent Analysis (2018) and the Extent of the Phenomenon

Andrejevs¹

2022

Journal for the Study of the New Testament

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The hypothetical phenomenon known as Luke’s ‘unpicking’ of some of Matthew’s Markan material has occupied the attention of synoptic problem specialists since the seminal article by F. Gerald Downing (1965). The discussion has received a number of contributions in recent years, first with an exchange between Christopher M. Tuckett and Francis Watson (both essays published in 2018) and now with a separate analysis by Eric Eve (2021). A comprehensive tabulation of the phenomenon, however, is still lacking, with the authors selectively focusing on some of the data. Eve concludes his discussion by suggesting that he has explained the phenomenon for the Farrer Hypothesis. However, Eve’s analysis does not include a number of the instances tabulated just a few years earlier by Watson. Moreover, Watson’s tabulation itself is need of an update, being unnecessarily narrow. In this article, I analyze Watson’s contribution to the discussion, developing his recognition of the phenomenon of unpicking and adjusting several aspects of his analysis. Assessment of the procedure’s difficulty does not belong to the article’s scope. Rather, this article aims to provide a comprehensive tabulation of Farrer Luke’s unpicking that can be utilized by synoptic specialists on all sides of the current discussion.

show abstract

Section: Watson and Fh Luke’s Unpickingmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 96%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“… 19. Downing’s (2004: 465) attention is directed to the parable’s disarticulation from its Markan context in Matthew rather than in-parable unpicking (contra Tuckett 2018: 136-37). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“… 20. Tuckett’s (2018: 136-37) attention is directed to in-parable unpicking rather than the parable’s disarticulation from its Markan context in Matthew (contra Downing 2004: 465). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

FH Luke’s ‘Unpicking’: Some Observations on Francis Watson’s Recent Analysis (2018) and the Extent of the Phenomenon

Andrejevs¹

2022

Journal for the Study of the New Testament

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Gnats, Camels, and Matthew’s Use of Luke

Garrow¹

2023

Journal for the Study of the New Testament

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A striking feature of the current state of Synoptic Problem studies is the almost universal acceptance of Markan Priority. If Mark was indeed used by both Matthew and Luke, this reduces the number of simple solutions to the Synoptic Problem to just two: Luke used Matthew or Matthew used Luke. Studies promoting the latter option, the Matthean Posteriority Hypothesis (MPH), have recently begun to attract wider critical attention. This article examines the three critical responses published sivnce 2017 and asks which of the problems so far identified presents the most serious problem for the MPH.

show abstract

Disagreements of ach Evangelist with the Minor Close Agreements of the Other Two

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

FH Luke’s ‘Unpicking’: Some Observations on Francis Watson’s Recent Analysis (2018) and the Extent of the Phenomenon

FH Luke’s ‘Unpicking’: Some Observations on Francis Watson’s Recent Analysis (2018) and the Extent of the Phenomenon

Gnats, Camels, and Matthew’s Use of Luke

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About